Summary Of Marbury V. Madison And Judicial Review

In Robert Lowry Clinton’s book Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review, the author describes the controversial ideal of judicial review, which became a major power delegated to the Supreme Court following the case Marbury v. Madison. Clinton does this by tracing the origins of judicial review that preceded the court case, as well as describing the institution through the court case itself and its future in the American justice system. Despite the court’s now famous history, Clinton claims in his book an agreed upon notion of judicial review of constitutional matters has existed before, during and after the Marbury decision. Clinton believes the Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison was significant in the establishment of judicial review, solely

The first section of the finding was that Marbury had been “duly appointed… and that the secretary of state did not have the privilege to later withhold it” (Clinton 15-16). Referring to the writ of mandamus, Marshall also ruled that the writ constituted as “appropriate legal remedy for resolution” (Clinton 16). The second section of the decision dealt with the power of the Court to issue the writ, ruling that the “Court’s answer is negative” (Clinton 16). What this means, in terms of the verdict, was Marbury was entitled to his commission and has applied for an appropriate legal remedy, but was in the wrong court. Clinton uses this to show the significance of the first Supreme Court usage of judicial review. By ruling on this, Marshall did indeed establish the notion of judicial review, but, ironically, the Chief Justice, by coining this term, decreased the power of the Supreme Court and the Judiciary. This, however, lead to what Clinton calls a state decisis, or a doctrine of precedence that becomes “the very essence of judicial duty” (Clinton 30). With this in mind, Clinton creates this thesis because he addresses a primary problem, which the book revolves around: how did the term judicial review garner the status of legend and transcend history? Clinton answers this question by addressing three crucial time periods of judicial review in the United States: 1.) Pre-Marbury v. Madison, 2.) Marbury v. Madison, the case itself and 3.) Following the court case when it became something of a national