Marbury, the president of the United States appointed him a justice of peace... And that the seal of the United States, affixed thereto by the secretary of state, is conclusive testimony of the verity of the signature, and of the completion of the appointment; and that the appointment conferred on him a legal right to the office for the space of five years...he [Marbury] has a consequent right to the commission; a refusal to deliver which is a plain violation of that right, for which the laws of his country afford him a remedy" (Marshall 1803). However, "the authority, therefore, given to the supreme court, by the act establishing the judicial courts of the United States, to issue writs of mandamus to public officers, appears not to be warranted by the constitution," so Marshall stated the U.S. Supreme Court had no direct authority to issue the writ under the Judiciary Act. After losing in the Supreme Court the plaintiffs could have applied to the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia for the writ of mandamus that would have required Madison to deliver their commissions. "The D.C. Circuit clearly had the power to issue the writ. So why didn't the plaintiffs go there? And for that matter, why didn't they go to the D.C. Circuit Court first, before going to the Supreme Court" (Grossman 2003). Marbury...
Madison is not an effective stare decisis case for Mr. Edwards to use. The case was decided based upon Supreme Court jurisdictional matters and the question of obtaining a right to a commission was not put before the appropriate D.C. circuit court afterwards. He is right in learning from the case to bring the case before the federal district court, and not follow Marbury's lead, but there are no outstanding precedents in the stare decisis mode to guide him.Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now