Marbury v. Madison
Supreme Court of the United States
February 24, 1803, Decided
No Number in Original
[*153] [**66] Afterwards, on the 24th of February the following opinion of the court was delivered by the chief justice.
Opinion of the court.
At the last term on the affidavits then read and filed with the clerk, a rule was granted in this case, requiring the secretary of state to show cause why a mandamus [*154] should not issue, directing him to deliver to William Marbury his commission as a justice of the peace of the county of Washington, in the district of Columbia.
No cause has been shown, and the present motion is for a mandamus. [***32] The peculiar delicacy of this case, the novelty of some of its circumstances, and the real difficulty attending the points which occur in it, require a complete exposition of the principles, on which the opinion to be given by the court, is founded.
These principles have been, on the side of the applicant, very ably argued at the bar. In rendering the opinion of the court, there will be some departure in form, though not in substance, from the points stated in that argument.
In the order in which the court has viewed this subject, the following questions have been considered and decided.
1st. Has the applicant a right to the commission he demands?
2dly. If he has a right, and that right has been violated, do the laws of his country afford him a remedy?
3dly. If they do afford him a remedy, is it a mandamus issuing from this court?
The first object of enquiry is, Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
5 U.S. 137 *; 2 L. Ed. 60 **; 1803 U.S. LEXIS 352 ***; 1 Cranch 137
WILLIAM MARBURY v. JAMES MADISON, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
Prior History: [***1] AT the last term, viz. December term, 1801, William Marbury, Dennis Ramsay, Robert Townsend Hooe, and William Harper, by their counsel, Charles Lee, esq. late attorney general of the United States, severally moved the court for a rule to James Madison, secretary of state of the United States, to show cause why a mandamus should not issue commanding him to cause to be delivered to them respectively their several commissions as justices of the peace in the district of Columbia. This motion was supported by affidavits of the following facts; that notice of this motion had been given to Mr. Madison; that Mr. Adams, the late president of the United States, nominated the applicants to the senate for their advice and consent to be appointed justices of the peace of the district of Columbia; that the senate advised and consented to the appointments; that commissions in the due form were signed by the said president appointing them justices, &c. and that the seal of the United States was in due form affixed to the said commissions by the secretary of state; that the applicants have requested Mr. Madison to deliver them their said commissions, who has not complied with that request; and that [***2] their said commissions are withheld from them; that the applicants have made application to Mr. Madison as secretary of state of the United States at his office, for information whether the commissions were signed and sealed as aforesaid; that explicit and satisfactory information has not been given to that enquiry, either by the secretary of state or by any officer of the department of state; that application has been made to the secretary of the Senate for a certificate of the nomination of the applicants, and of the advice and consent of the senate, who has declined giving such a certificate; whereupon a rule was laid to show cause on the 4th day of this term. This rule having been duly served,
Disposition: The rule was discharged.
appointment, cases, mandamus, seal, courts, secretary of state, affixed, the will, head of the department, legal right, principles, vested, words, appellate jurisdiction, declare, original jurisdiction, enquire, powers, president of the united states, written constitution, solemnities, nomination, prescribed, authorize, directing, signature, supposed, assign, limits, act of congress
Constitutional Law, The Presidency, Appointment of Officials, Military & Veterans Law, Armed Forces, Organization, US President, Administrative Law, Separation of Powers, Executive Controls, Congressional Duties & Powers, General Overview, Separation of Powers, Substantive Due Process, Scope, Governments, Legislation, Statutory Remedies & Rights, The Judiciary, Case or Controversy, Political Questions, Foreign Affairs, Civil Procedure, Writs, Common Law Writs, Mandamus, Remedies, Trials, Jury Trials, Province of Court & Jury, Jurisdiction, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Actions, Appeals, Appellate Jurisdiction, State Court Review, Jurisdictional Sources, Constitutional Sources, Supremacy Clause, US Supreme Court Review, Constitutionality of Legislation, Constitutional Questions