This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Chapter 1- Judicial Review and Jurisdiction of Federal Cts in C-al cases SC has the power to declare the acts of Cs invalid. Ct is the last word on C-al interpretation. We are not final b/c we are infailable, we are infailable because we are final. No explicit textual grant in C for jud review. Marbury v. Madison C is the fundamental law, superior to ordinary legislation and binding to all parties. SC is supposed to interpret C. Holding: Marbury had a right to his commission, but SC could not enforce that because Marbury sued under a jurisdictional law that was unconstitutional. Issue #1: Does Marbury have a right to his commission? Yes, the commission became a vested legal right upon execution, and not delivery. Issue #2: Is there a legal remedy for the violation of this right? Yes, legal remedy needed for legal wrong. Issue #3 Is Marbury entitled to the remedy for which he applied at the SC? (a) What is the nature of the writ? Could the ct order the executive branch/president to do something? Yes- it is not the nature of the executive branch that limits the judicial review, but the nature of the act enacted by the executive branch. 2 Exceptions from judicial review: 1- If the action is political 2- If the C, placed the matter under the j/d of the Exec branch. + 3- ct’s institutional competence. (b) Does this ct have the power/jurisdiction to act? NO- article 3 of the C creates appellate jurisdiction for the Supreme Court. This means that in all other cases, you cannot increase the original. SC has original jurisdiction only in 3 classes of cases and congress cannot add to the original jurisdiction. SC has appellate j/d w/ such exceptions and regulations as Congress deems. Problems with Marbury- the C does not specifically say who should have the final say- it’s all inferences and assertions. - Marshall was too close to the issue and should have separated himself from the case. - It is clear that the Pres is subject to specific restraints under C, but Marshall asserts open ended powers of review. Principles established by Marbury: 1. Actions of the Exec are subject to judicial review under C. 2. Fed judiciary can order the executive to comply w/ C-al principles. 3. If an act is repugnant to the C invalidated. 4. C binds all parts of the fed gov- this is clear and there is a lot of historical support for it. 5. C is the supreme law and the judiciary is the branch who interprets it- it is at the very foundation of a unique document and the framers intended the judiciary to interpret issues arising under it- supremacy clause, oath of judges to uphold C, etc. 6. The judiciary has the final say on interpreting C decision binding on all branches of gov....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/12/2008 for the course LAW 6005 taught by Professor Collins during the Spring '06 term at Colorado.
- Spring '06
- Constitutional Law