Marbury v. Madison Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Marbury v. Madison | 5 U.S. (Cranch 1) 137 (1803)
The presidential election of 1800 was one of the most contentious in our young nation’s history. Federalist President John Adams fought for reelection, but it became clear that the Anti-Federalists, led by Democratic-Republican and Vice President Thomas Jefferson, would take the office. Meanwhile, in an effort to preserve the influence of the party, the Federalist-led Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, now known as the Midnight Judges Act, which reorganized the federal judiciary, and the District of Columbia Organic Act, both of which created dozens of new judgeships and justiceships.

Adams then spent his last next few weeks in office appointing dozens of Federalists to the judiciary. These appointees became known as the midnight judges. The group obtained approval from Congress on March 2nd. The commissions were signed by Adams and sealed by the Secretary of State on March 3rd. The last remaining step was for the commissions to be physically delivered to the appointees by the Secretary of State.

Have Questions about this Case?

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:

casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

[angrysshark]

Thanks, this really helped! I had 24 hours to write a page about this but I couldn't find any websites that explained it well for me.

[rrjwnownbuwjclwjkdjjensiwn]

This video made me cry. I couldn't understand anything

[savinig]

AKJKJEF I'M PANICKING THIS IS SO LAST MINUTE BUT I GOT THIS MUCH...President John Adams wanted to expand the federalist party’s influence by making the Judiciary Act 1801 and appointing a bunch of new judges because he was going to lose the election to Jefferson. Marbury was one of those judges who was going to be newly appointed. He didn’t get his commission letter on time because the government changed, Adams lost and Jefferson was appointed to office, along with his new secretary of state, James Madison. Madison refused to give Marbury the commission letter. Marbury tried to sue him. The courts however, identified the act as unconstitutional because it expands the power of the supreme court beyond what is granted by the constitution and conflicts with article 3 so Marbury lost the case.

(feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but my brain is being deep fried rn)

[bruhman]

Summary:
John Adams appoints new judges and told his secretary to deliver their commissions (paper that says they can work), but his secretary didn’t do it until after John Adams was removed from office and replaced by Madison. Then Madison took office and told his secretary that he didn’t have to deliver the commissions. Because of this one of the judges that Adams previously appointed sought to get his commission somehow so he sued. From the case they found: the judges have the right to get their commission and it’s not the judicial branches job to enforce (I think). To come to the verdict the judge in hard of the case looked to the constitution to see if what they did was constitutional, which is called judicial review.

[BK-phcq]

Most important thing about this case: established judicial review.

[kojack]

wtf. I have no idea what this is talking about. My midterm is in 2 1/2 hours. fml

[Lawperson]

To all the people who are confused.... that’s because Quimbee is a source for law students. It’s not geared towards people who aren’t in law school

[beanbunsoup]

SUMMARY FOR DUMMIES:
Dude hires a bunch of judges and asks his bro to deliver them their letters saying their hired. He leaves office and tells the new guy to not deliver the letters. One of the guys who was hired and didn’t get a letter sues

[gahrie]

This is the first time I've ever seen anyone mention the fact that Marshall was the Secretary of State who failed to deliver the commissions. Nobody ever asks why he didn't recuse himself when the case reached the Supreme Court.

[KanaRam-zrjo]

I am Indian When I was studying world politics, then Marbury vs Madison controversy came in front of me, so I was curious to know about them in detail and I was searching on YouTube, then your video came in front of me. You explained very well.

[최윤준-ye]

I’m still confused af I’m about to fail this test

[donnaclark]

Thank you for the clear explanation for this case. I can now teach it better to my students

[jasmineyonanstudent]

Thanks so much for explaining this case in layman's terms! I so appreciate it!

[sarahjeanne]

Even though english isn't my first language the video helped a lot ! It's more clear to me thanks for that.

[shushilkabir]

Finals in 5 hours and I'm here. Judging by the comments this is the last stage for law students.

[Fireeater-rlep]

Does this case set the precedent that any law that goes against the Constitution is null and void?

[jakeydelasbebs]

So the Supreme Court struck down a law that extended its power beyond the limits of the Constitution...by extending its own power beyond the limits of the Constitution...

[JoseSanchez-wqxk]

Please make this easier for student to understand

[creatureconnor]

I find it funny and sad how everyone forgets about poor Marbury. The court literally took his side and he won the case, but the dude still never got his dang commission for some reason.

[JenniferBellfilms]

Bless you. I have my first law midterm tomorrow on this case. ❤️