When one thinks of the Supreme Court, he or she thinks of the independent judiciary, the branch of government that’s above politics. He or she thinks of the grounded counter majoritarian, the protector of fundamental rights. If I were to walk up to a random person on the street, chances are they would separate the Supreme Court from the legislative and Executive Branch. The Supreme Court commands a sort of reverence. It uplifts the underdog using impeccable, objective legal argumentation. The poison of politics has no weight. However, this is incorrect. The court is not independent from politics at all, in fact, the very conception of the Court was because of political maneuvering.
Until 1803 when Marbury v. Madison was decided, The Supreme Court as we know it did not exist. In Article 3 of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court is established. Article 3 is one of the shortest segments of the Constitution; it reads like a brief paragraph. Many believe it was left this way intentionally. The founding fathers could not agree on their vision of what the Supreme Court would look like, and they did not know what they wanted from the Supreme Court; they were unsure of how powerful the Court would be. Because Article 3 is so small and unspecific, the Supreme Court was able to become the powerhouse that it is today.
In the year 1800, Thomas Jefferson, the ultimate anti federalist, defeated John Adams, the federalist. Before Jefferson took office, John Adams had passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, which appointed more judges to more courts. Prior to this Act, The Judiciary Act of 1789 had been signed into law by George Washington, and this Act gave the courts the ability to issue writs of mandamus. William Marbury was one of the men who was going to be a new judge, but his commission was never delivered. Marbury, in an attempt to secure his position as a judge, went to the Supreme Court to order a writ of mandamus that would compel the current Secretary of State, James Madison, to deliver the documents needed to become a judge. John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at the time. He had bounced from various positions of power in American politics through the years; he was in the Continental Army, he helped to negotiate the XYZ affair with France, he served on the House of Representatives, and he was Secretary of State. What’s especially important to note is that John Marshall was a federalist, and he was very much so enmeshed in the world of politics. Thus, in deciding the outcome of Marbury vs. Madison, his political agenda would benefit from Jefferson’s federalist appointees to the Courts. However, the Supreme Court had no legitimate power, and John Marshall knew this. In deciding this case, Marshall was at a crossroad. Should he issue the writ of mandamus so that the courts can be filled with fellow federalist judges? If he did this he would risk President Jefferson ignoring his order, and the Supreme Court could never be a force to reckon with.
Marshall decided to take one for the team, and thus established the power of the Supreme Court. In his opinion, Marshall argued that the Constitution did not give the Supreme Court the right to issue writs of mandamus, and thus deemed the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional. In doing so, Marshall established the power of Judicial Review, where the Court could strike down acts of Congress or laws enacted by the President if it was deemed unconstitutional. Marshall may have lost the battle, but he won the war. Had he decided to issue the writ of mandamus, he would have risked the Court’s decision being undermined by the new President Thomas Jefferson. Thus, John Marshall acted strategically, manipulating the law to establish the power of the Court long term.
Comments