My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available! Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680 Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680 Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023 Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495 Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
The reason why Marbury v Madison is the most important Supreme Court case ever was because before it, the Court wasn’t taken seriously. But Marbury gave the Supreme Court the power of judicial review and made the Court a third coequal branch of government.
You forgot to include what happened to these dudes so I will finish it off for you. Marbury never became a Justice of the Peace so he followed his other love- basketball. He did well and spent a few years in the NBA playing for the Minnesota Timberwolves. James Madison, who incidentally was named after the avenue in New York where he was found, never amounted to much. He did go on to invent a kooky dance and a cycling event where you can slingshot your team mate by holding hands. He later became an angry old man who was disappointed they wrote a musical about his former friend Hamilton instead of him.
Did you hear about another famous Federalist, John Jay? Apparently, after serving as the first Chief Justice, he dropped the "H" from his name, got into Major League Baseball, and had a decent career playing for the St. Louis Cardinals, San Diego Padres, Chicago Cubs, Kansas City Royals, Arizona Diamondbacks, Chicago White Sox, and Los Angeles Angels.
A lot of history content on UA-cam ends up being pretty poorly researched and reductionist (ie copying the Wikipedia page). Thanks for making content that is both educational and entertaining.
@@iammrbeat i definitely prefer to listen to someone who knows and understands the case rather than someone who just reads a script . great video Mr.Beat!
Jefferson and his supporters were fearful that the Supreme Court would order Jefferson to deliver the commission to Marbury. Jefferson took office on March 4, 1801. His supporters in Congress canceled the Supreme Court’s 1802 Term, and it was not able to decide the case until 1803. As you point out, Marshall resolved the matter in a very clever way. First, he gave Jefferson a long-winded lecture declaring that Marbury was entitled to the commission, but then decided that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to issue the writ of mandamus. Thus, he asserted the right and power of the Court to declare Acts of Congress unconstitutional, an idea that the Jeffersonians despised, but did it in a way that they could not complain about. The Court would not declare another federal statute unconstitutional until the Dred Scott decision in 1857.
Without marbury v. madison’s ruling of judicial review, the judicial branch would have never had been as powerful as the other two branches. Therefore, without a foot in the door against the legislative and executive branches, the triangle of checks and balances would’ve fallen apart. Besides that, without judicial review, civil rights and liberties would have never been furthered as far as they are today. So yeah! I 100% agree with you Mr. Beat, Marbury v. Madison is the most important case!
Ah I love Marbury v Madison! One of the simplest and most important Court Cases to study. And one I’m very appreciative of- gotta love the Supreme Court!
Was the Supreme Court not given the power of judicial review when it was established? Article 3 Sec 2 - "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;..." Specifying that "the laws of the United States" are under judicial power implies judicial review of laws that congress passes, right? Why did it take Marbury v. Madison to confirm that the Judiciary has this power even though it's already specified in the Constitution? Something I've always wondered, thanks for another great video.
Uhh d1, i think you muddled up the reading there is a comma in there that is very important, all after arising is the source of the suits, all before it is what the court was empowered to handle... the "the laws of the united states" is not implied to review the law, but to judge cases ARISING UNDER those laws", Marbury was important in defining that did not exclude judging the constitutionality of the law itself and not just cases charged under the law...
In a way, judicial review is similar to jury nullification. A law may be used to convict someone, but if that law is illegal (insofar as it violates the Constitution, the Supreme Law) the Court is not obligated to sustain that conviction, and in fact their power to do so is implied naturally when there are contradicting laws. Likewise, juries are not obligated to sustain convictions if they find the laws used to convict a person immoral.
You know, as an Indonesian Law student, we actually learn this court decision as part of Constitutional Law subject especially in the History of the concept of Supreme Court itself, i've been binging your videos recently Mr Beat, and already subscribe, you are doing a great work for so many people
So many to pick from. Marbury is arguably the most important, but I think there is debate on if it’s the most consequential. Either McCulloch or Dred Scott in my opinion.
@@steampunkedbull the problem with Marbury is yeah its important because of it pretty much the bedrock of the power of Supreme Court. like has there been a case where they didn't uses judicial review? its like saying 1st amendment is the most important because, without it, the others make no sense. so I think we should make it clear that the BEDROCK principle shouldn't count. so this can achieve more informative debate like how 14th amendment is the most important or how Gibbons v. Ogden is the most important supreme court decision without the knew jerk "well that wouldnt come about if *that* one wanst already decided".
This was a highly appropriate "all-star" type video for December's UA-cam glut of "whaaaaaaat, this is awesome!" posting. I'm usually able to remember the details of McCullough v. Maryland (which would be in the top three structural decisions the Court has made as well), but this case always gives me the fuzzy memories. "It was about appointments and... umm..."
Only Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was declared unconstitutional in this case. According to Oyez, it "conflicted with Article III Section 2 of the US Constitution and was therefore null and void."
President During this time: Thomas Jefferson Chief Justice: Lil’ John Marshall Argued February 11, 1803 Decided February 24, 1803 Case Duration: 13 Days Decision: 4-0 in favor of Marbury WE MADE THE SUPREME COURT RELEVANT YAY
I had to watch this for homework and must I say thank you for actually holding my attention the entire time. it’s very rare for an educational video to keep my attention and allow me to learn everything. Lol thanks.
Nice concise video. Yes, it is the most important court opinion in history because it affects the checks and balances. The legislature (Congress) actually creates law and is considered the far most powerful branch of government. The judiciary can not make law, and is far more limited to simply interpret what the law is. However this court opinion empowered the judiciary with the ability to now delete law passed by Congress by using the Constitution. Ultimately, this opinion now enables the court to use the constitution as a sledgehammer to destroy laws. The constitution, of course, is a document which is all about limiting the government and telling the government what it CANNOT do to the people. Therefore, the use of the constitution is often an anti-government tactic; that is, litigants use the constitution to destroy or nullify laws passed by the legislature.
delcapslock100 Actually, all of the federal administrative agencies are created through Acts of Congress and their entire scope of authority and framework are established by Congress. Congress’ administrative agencies have long been considered borderline unconstitutional because Congress through its Acts can create an agency which has legislative powers, executive powers, and judicial powers. Congress is far and above the most powerful branch, only curtailed by the Constitution, which the judiciary (in this case the Supreme Court) interprets and applies when appeals come before them for consideration.
@@SagaciousSilence Someone once told me that the Judicial Branch is the most powerful (and the one most likely to be able to depose the rest of the Government), since the Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, it's even more difficult to remove a Justice from office than the President, and they have unilateral decision-making power (including that of nullifying legislation) that can only be reversed by another Supreme Court decision, yet they also have unilateral power to decide which cases they will hear in the first place.
Yes, Marbury v. Madison is the most important SCOTUS case in history for meta-self-referential reasons: The outcome of this case is what makes almost all of the SIGNIFICANT SCOTUS cases possible.
Absolutely positively it's the most important decision in Supreme Court history. Without that they would have basically very limited power instead of being the supreme law of the land. I like how you included Darth Vader too because little John was kind of manipulating things like Emperor Palpatine. Cool
Did judicial review not exist before this or was this just the first time it was needed in the still young nation? I think judicial review was inevitable do to the nature of the job of the SCOTUS and it was definitely not a new concept at the time. As much as I have disagreed with many SCOTUS decisions, I hate the thought of nothing keeping the legislative branch in check even more. It is a good system that still falls short sometimes.
Dear Mr Beat - my classes and I found these Supreme Court case videos brilliant for helping with A-Level Politics in the UK. Thanks so much. If you're taking requests, could you tackle Texas vs US 2016 and NFIB v Sebelius 2012 before the exams!
The seems like a paradox. They only had the power to overturn a law because it was unconstitutional only because they say they did? How did everybody react to this? Did other branches try to undo this?
its amazing that the whole Kavanaugh debacle could have been a replay of the Marbury instance and Trump could get a hatrick when it comes to the appointment in regards to Ginsberg
Marbury v. Madison did not invent the power of judicial review. In Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 171 (1796), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of an excise tax on carriages. I submit that it is as much an exercise of judicial review to hold an act constitutional as it is to declare one unconstitutional. Of course, declaring an act unconstitutional attracts more attention. :)
Considering it set constitutional standards for the Supreme Court that will impact future events caused by either or both Legislative and Executive branches that involved Supreme Court's decision on what's constitutional, I say so. Even though it did lead to some rough conflicts between branches like when the Supreme Court put a stop on many of FDR's plans to try and get us out of the Great Depression because the Supreme Court felt it gave FDR too much power as president. I'll admit though, FDR didn't exactly try to make things easier with dealing with the Supreme court decision by trying to increase the number of Judges so he can get more people who would go with his plans in the Supreme Court.
Wait!!! -- Your video is incomplete!!! What happened to Marbury? On one hand, the court said he should get his commission, but on the other hand, the court said the law that allowed him to sue in court was unconstitutional to begin with?!?!? --- So, what was the practical impact?
Marshall was acting Secretary of State under Adams until noon on March 4, 1801. He was also Chief Justice for a few weeks before that. (They were more fluid back then.) Madison was Jefferson's Secretary of State, so the charge of delivering the commissions went from Marshall to Madison. If Adams had appointed the Judges earlier, Marshall could have delivered the commissions and this case wouldn't exist.
2 questions What is the duty of the judge when interpreting a law against the Constitution? Can the democratically elected legislator amend the Constitution by drafting laws?
I'm pretty confuse wit the midnight judge like other sources said John Adams nominates 42 justices of the peace with 16 new circuit judges but why here in this video John Adams only nominated 23 of justices of the peace. ? can someone explain me in an easy way.
Hi Mr. Beat, You recently said on one of your videos about Henry Wallace that you weren’t a fan of socialism. Yet, most industrialized countries have adopted hybrid models combining free enterprise with vital social programs. Please consider making your case in a subsequent video.
There was a case before Marbury that gave the Supreme Court the review power. However, if you read a great piece written by Sarah Bilder in the Yale law Journal called: "The Corporate Origins of Judicial Review" you will learn oh so much more, but prolly outside the scope of your viewing audience.
Hylton v. United States. In that case the Court upheld the law, but did use the power of judicial review. Samuel Chase wrote "As I do not think the tax on carriages is a direct tax, it is unnecessary, at this time, for me to determine, whether this court, constitutionally possesses the power to declare an act of Congress void, on the ground of its being made contrary to, and in violation of, the Constitution; but if the court have such power, I am free to declare, that I will never exercise it, but in a very clear case." Chase was in the majority in Marbury v. Madison a few years later. This was before his impeachment and acquittal.
Do Murray v. Curlett! I remember studying this case in Constitutional Law, truly an important case for what we know in the present as separation of powers...
John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court during the US Supreme Court Case Marbury v. Madison and John Marshall was an American Lawyer and John Marshall was the 4th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court from February 4, 1801 to July 6, 1835 and John Marshall was Appointed by President John Adams and John Marshall was Sworn In as the 4th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court on February 4, 1801 at the Age of 45 years old and John Marshall was the 4th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court for 34 Years and from February 4, 1801 to July 6, 1835 was 34 Years and John Marshall was the Longest Serving Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court in American History and John Marshall had a Job for 34 Years and Chief Justice John Marshall Died while on the Job and John Marshall was 79 years old when he Died and John Marshall’s Cause of Death was a Stagecoach Accident, and Suffering severe injuries.
@@iammrbeat I think the Taft Court would be particularly interesting as he was president before being Chief Justice. He's the only man in U.S. history to hold those two positions!
Reading old threads on a message board I'm on, reminded that Brown from Brown v Topeka died fairly recently. IMO, that was the most important case of the 20th century.
This is the most important Supreme Court case because well its the God of Supreme Court cases. We all know the cases that changed our culture, society and law but those wouldn't have been achieved if this case didn't exist.
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
The reason why Marbury v Madison is the most important Supreme Court case ever was because before it, the Court wasn’t taken seriously. But Marbury gave the Supreme Court the power of judicial review and made the Court a third coequal branch of government.
Darn straight!
You forgot to include what happened to these dudes so I will finish it off for you. Marbury never became a Justice of the Peace so he followed his other love- basketball. He did well and spent a few years in the NBA playing for the Minnesota Timberwolves. James Madison, who incidentally was named after the avenue in New York where he was found, never amounted to much. He did go on to invent a kooky dance and a cycling event where you can slingshot your team mate by holding hands. He later became an angry old man who was disappointed they wrote a musical about his former friend Hamilton instead of him.
#facts
Did you hear about another famous Federalist, John Jay? Apparently, after serving as the first Chief Justice, he dropped the "H" from his name, got into Major League Baseball, and had a decent career playing for the St. Louis Cardinals, San Diego Padres, Chicago Cubs, Kansas City Royals, Arizona Diamondbacks, Chicago White Sox, and Los Angeles Angels.
Lol. Awesome!!
Jon Jay
Marbury became super popular playing in China!
A lot of history content on UA-cam ends up being pretty poorly researched and reductionist (ie copying the Wikipedia page). Thanks for making content that is both educational and entertaining.
Well it helps that I already knew this case pretty well. Thanks for the kind words. :D
@@iammrbeat i definitely prefer to listen to someone who knows and understands the case rather than someone who just reads a script . great video Mr.Beat!
Jefferson and his supporters were fearful that the Supreme Court would order Jefferson to deliver the commission to Marbury. Jefferson took office on March 4, 1801. His supporters in Congress canceled the Supreme Court’s 1802 Term, and it was not able to decide the case until 1803.
As you point out, Marshall resolved the matter in a very clever way. First, he gave Jefferson a long-winded lecture declaring that Marbury was entitled to the commission, but then decided that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to issue the writ of mandamus. Thus, he asserted the right and power of the Court to declare Acts of Congress unconstitutional, an idea that the Jeffersonians despised, but did it in a way that they could not complain about. The Court would not declare another federal statute unconstitutional until the Dred Scott decision in 1857.
Funny, UA-cam just sent me a notification for this video. What a pleasant reminder 😃
Well did you watch it? :)
@@iammrbeat Of course!
Without marbury v. madison’s ruling of judicial review, the judicial branch would have never had been as powerful as the other two branches. Therefore, without a foot in the door against the legislative and executive branches, the triangle of checks and balances would’ve fallen apart. Besides that, without judicial review, civil rights and liberties would have never been furthered as far as they are today. So yeah! I 100% agree with you Mr. Beat, Marbury v. Madison is the most important case!
Ah I love Marbury v Madison! One of the simplest and most important Court Cases to study.
And one I’m very appreciative of- gotta love the Supreme Court!
The sad thing is that the court room in which this decision was made is now a storage room :(
Was the Supreme Court not given the power of judicial review when it was established?
Article 3 Sec 2 - "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;..."
Specifying that "the laws of the United States" are under judicial power implies judicial review of laws that congress passes, right? Why did it take Marbury v. Madison to confirm that the Judiciary has this power even though it's already specified in the Constitution? Something I've always wondered, thanks for another great video.
I think it was definitely implied. Just wasn't explicitly stated until this case. :)
Yes that's what the Supreme Court has to do. Point out stuff that politicians want to ignore.
Uhh d1, i think you muddled up the reading there is a comma in there that is very important, all after arising is the source of the suits, all before it is what the court was empowered to handle... the "the laws of the united states" is not implied to review the law, but to judge cases ARISING UNDER those laws", Marbury was important in defining that did not exclude judging the constitutionality of the law itself and not just cases charged under the law...
@@Ugly_German_Truths The complex legal language of the Founders in 1788 is far too complicated for the average American mind in the 21st century
In a way, judicial review is similar to jury nullification. A law may be used to convict someone, but if that law is illegal (insofar as it violates the Constitution, the Supreme Law) the Court is not obligated to sustain that conviction, and in fact their power to do so is implied naturally when there are contradicting laws. Likewise, juries are not obligated to sustain convictions if they find the laws used to convict a person immoral.
You know, as an Indonesian Law student, we actually learn this court decision as part of Constitutional Law subject especially in the History of the concept of Supreme Court itself, i've been binging your videos recently Mr Beat, and already subscribe, you are doing a great work for so many people
You're 100% CORRECT about Marbury v Madison!
Not even 1 minute into the video and I already know this will clear up every question I have about this case.
“Lil John...” YEAH!
OH KAY!!!
@@ricky99laquiet!!!!
What is the most important Supreme Court decision in American history? Eh?
Bush v. Gore
Definately Marburry v. Madison, without it none of the other supreme court cases would even happen.
So many to pick from. Marbury is arguably the most important, but I think there is debate on if it’s the most consequential. Either McCulloch or Dred Scott in my opinion.
@@steampunkedbull the problem with Marbury is yeah its important because of it pretty much the bedrock of the power of Supreme Court. like has there been a case where they didn't uses judicial review? its like saying 1st amendment is the most important because, without it, the others make no sense. so I think we should make it clear that the BEDROCK principle shouldn't count. so this can achieve more informative debate like how 14th amendment is the most important or how Gibbons v. Ogden is the most important supreme court decision without the knew jerk "well that wouldnt come about if *that* one wanst already decided".
Besides Marbury v Madison, I think Gibbons v Ogden is important
Thanks for the great video, Mr. Beat!!!! You videos rock : )
Currently speed running through all of your videos on the 14 required cases for the AP Government Exam, wish me luck 🙏
This was a highly appropriate "all-star" type video for December's UA-cam glut of "whaaaaaaat, this is awesome!" posting. I'm usually able to remember the details of McCullough v. Maryland (which would be in the top three structural decisions the Court has made as well), but this case always gives me the fuzzy memories. "It was about appointments and... umm..."
Yeah...the details of the case are not that glamorous, but as long as people know its importance I'd be happy.
Only Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was declared unconstitutional in this case. According to Oyez, it "conflicted with Article III Section 2 of the US Constitution and was therefore null and void."
I like Adams as a Founder, not as President.
A very good video of the decision of Marbury v. Madison. Much improved.
Thank you much! Yeah, I've come a ways since the early days. :)
@iammrbeat you really have. I congratulate you for being productive in your years, something I cannot do myself.
0:08 Last minute appointments by John Adams
1:42 Marbury did not receive his commission
2:16 Theee Questions
4:00 Gif exchange
4:33 Redoing videos
Those time stamps are somewhat random, but thank you!
Come on Mr. Adams
Madison: that’s I’m not in the Constitution - I’d know, I wrote it.
Marshall: and that’s the point.
Mr. Beat please make a video about the first two Supreme Court Cases in American History: Staphorst v. Maryland of 1791, and West v. Barnes of 1791!
Excellent video!
Thank you :D
President During this time: Thomas Jefferson
Chief Justice: Lil’ John Marshall
Argued February 11, 1803
Decided February 24, 1803
Case Duration: 13 Days
Decision: 4-0 in favor of Marbury
WE MADE THE SUPREME COURT RELEVANT YAY
I had to watch this for homework and must I say thank you for actually holding my attention the entire time. it’s very rare for an educational video to keep my attention and allow me to learn everything. Lol thanks.
"Why the Supreme Court Is Relevant" ==> 'Cause SCOTUS said "We're the Decider! What We Say, GOES!"
So it was written, so it's alwayd been done.
"All laws repugnant to the constitution, are null and void" bust out the open carry boys! 2nd amendment is alive and well!
Double collab! Also, 10/10 accurate conversations.
lol you know it
Nice concise video. Yes, it is the most important court opinion in history because it affects the checks and balances. The legislature (Congress) actually creates law and is considered the far most powerful branch of government. The judiciary can not make law, and is far more limited to simply interpret what the law is. However this court opinion empowered the judiciary with the ability to now delete law passed by Congress by using the Constitution. Ultimately, this opinion now enables the court to use the constitution as a sledgehammer to destroy laws. The constitution, of course, is a document which is all about limiting the government and telling the government what it CANNOT do to the people. Therefore, the use of the constitution is often an anti-government tactic; that is, litigants use the constitution to destroy or nullify laws passed by the legislature.
Well put. I agree with you and I'll add that Marshall was also motivated by his need to push back against the Democratic Republicans.
I would say the executive branch is considered the most powerful. It seems to have the most power to control the country's legislative agenda.
delcapslock100 Actually, all of the federal administrative agencies are created through Acts of Congress and their entire scope of authority and framework are established by Congress. Congress’ administrative agencies have long been considered borderline unconstitutional because Congress through its Acts can create an agency which has legislative powers, executive powers, and judicial powers. Congress is far and above the most powerful branch, only curtailed by the Constitution, which the judiciary (in this case the Supreme Court) interprets and applies when appeals come before them for consideration.
@@SagaciousSilence Someone once told me that the Judicial Branch is the most powerful (and the one most likely to be able to depose the rest of the Government), since the Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, it's even more difficult to remove a Justice from office than the President, and they have unilateral decision-making power (including that of nullifying legislation) that can only be reversed by another Supreme Court decision, yet they also have unilateral power to decide which cases they will hear in the first place.
Yes, Marbury v. Madison is the most important SCOTUS case in history for meta-self-referential reasons: The outcome of this case is what makes almost all of the SIGNIFICANT SCOTUS cases possible.
OMG I have a project on this. THANK YOU!!!!
lol well that works out :)
Thank you Mr. Beat! Keep up the good work!
Thanks for your support. :D
Great video Mr. Beat.
Merry Christmas Mr and Mrs Beat. cheers
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas! (Sorry, I just got this)
+Mr. Beat Mrs Beat wished me a merry Christmas. no need for an apology. have a happy new years
I was wondering what you thought was the most important case.
Yeah this one BY FAR :)
It’s because this case made the Supreme Court what it is today.
I think it was implied, but you never said it explicitly: this was the first that the Supreme Court declared a law unconstitutional.
Happy Holidays Mr. Beat
Happy holidays!
Funny cuz we're learning about the Supreme Court in my gov class and we went over Marbudy v. Madison 2 days ago!
Aw I waited too long to make the video!
Absolutely positively it's the most important decision in Supreme Court history. Without that they would have basically very limited power instead of being the supreme law of the land. I like how you included Darth Vader too because little John was kind of manipulating things like Emperor Palpatine. Cool
Any chance for a Re-re-mix ?
This one was hard to follow. I just tasked my teenager son to explain it to me.
My period 2 loves you!!!!!!
as part of his period 2 i can confirm we do
So what did the Supreme Court do before this case?
Not much
Did judicial review not exist before this or was this just the first time it was needed in the still young nation? I think judicial review was inevitable do to the nature of the job of the SCOTUS and it was definitely not a new concept at the time.
As much as I have disagreed with many SCOTUS decisions, I hate the thought of nothing keeping the legislative branch in check even more. It is a good system that still falls short sometimes.
I remember learning about this in my government class in college, it blew my mind.
Dear Mr Beat - my classes and I found these Supreme Court case videos brilliant for helping with A-Level Politics in the UK. Thanks so much. If you're taking requests, could you tackle Texas vs US 2016 and NFIB v Sebelius 2012 before the exams!
Thanks for the kind words and the suggestions!
The seems like a paradox. They only had the power to overturn a law because it was unconstitutional only because they say they did? How did everybody react to this? Did other branches try to undo this?
its amazing that the whole Kavanaugh debacle could have been a replay of the Marbury instance and Trump could get a hatrick when it comes to the appointment in regards to Ginsberg
I don't like this!
@@OpinionesDeJACCsOpinions whhy do you hate it?
You are awesome!!!! Thank you very much!
I don't get how marbury gave the supreme court the power of judicial review? I thought he lost because the court said his claim was unconstitutionnel
No he lost because part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional.
Big thanks for making your audio listenable at 2x
If u posted this 2 months ago, would have been major key for APUSH
Well dang. Sorry it came too late!
Mr. Beat 👍🏻
Marbury v. Madison did not invent the power of judicial review. In Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 171 (1796), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of an excise tax on carriages. I submit that it is as much an exercise of judicial review to hold an act constitutional as it is to declare one unconstitutional. Of course, declaring an act unconstitutional attracts more attention. :)
Considering it set constitutional standards for the Supreme Court that will impact future events caused by either or both Legislative and Executive branches that involved Supreme Court's decision on what's constitutional, I say so. Even though it did lead to some rough conflicts between branches like when the Supreme Court put a stop on many of FDR's plans to try and get us out of the Great Depression because the Supreme Court felt it gave FDR too much power as president.
I'll admit though, FDR didn't exactly try to make things easier with dealing with the Supreme court decision by trying to increase the number of Judges so he can get more people who would go with his plans in the Supreme Court.
Wait!!! -- Your video is incomplete!!!
What happened to Marbury? On one hand, the court said he should get his commission, but on the other hand, the court said the law that allowed him to sue in court was unconstitutional to begin with?!?!? --- So, what was the practical impact?
He didn't get the job. I can't believe I left that out.
dugroz Good looking out I was wondering too!
But was Jefferson a piece of crap, tho?
ARTexplains Science and History yes
According to Adams in 1801, why yes he was.
glad I clicked on this because I realize now that I knew Marbury vs. Madison was an important early case but...I didn't know why, exactly
Definitely the most important decision. This is the foundation of what the Supreme Court have been doing to this day.
Oh a Christmas Special
It's A Wonderful Case
I watched eight videos on this and your video was the only one I could actually understand. Thanks!
Watching this for the third time....thank you so much, Mr.Beat!! :)
Thx man now I can pass my presentation about Marbury v Madison
i really like your explanation it helped me understand this confusing case
"Is Judicial Review Constitutional?" The answer is obviously, "No." So we should be doing something about this!!!!!
We watched this in government class a while back :)
What happened to Marbury’s appointment then? Did Jefferson just appoint a different person?
I thought John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and James Madison was the Secretary of State for Jefferson (not Adams)? (1:06)
Marshall was acting Secretary of State under Adams until noon on March 4, 1801. He was also Chief Justice for a few weeks before that. (They were more fluid back then.) Madison was Jefferson's Secretary of State, so the charge of delivering the commissions went from Marshall to Madison.
If Adams had appointed the Judges earlier, Marshall could have delivered the commissions and this case wouldn't exist.
I agree that this is the most important case in history. Thus why it was the first case studied in my very first law course!
Can you do a video on Gitlow v. New York?
That one is on my list. It's coming.
2 questions
What is the duty of the judge when interpreting a law against the Constitution?
Can the democratically elected legislator amend the Constitution by drafting laws?
I'm pretty confuse wit the midnight judge like other sources said John Adams nominates 42 justices of the peace with 16 new circuit judges but why here in this video John Adams only nominated 23 of justices of the peace. ? can someone explain me in an easy way.
This was awesome, thank you so much!
Hi Mr. Beat, You recently said on one of your videos about Henry Wallace that you weren’t a fan of socialism. Yet, most industrialized countries have adopted hybrid models combining free enterprise with vital social programs. Please consider making your case in a subsequent video.
this my man right here
There was a case before Marbury that gave the Supreme Court the review power. However, if you read a great piece written by Sarah Bilder in the Yale law Journal called: "The Corporate Origins of Judicial Review" you will learn oh so much more, but prolly outside the scope of your viewing audience.
Hylton v. United States. In that case the Court upheld the law, but did use the power of judicial review. Samuel Chase wrote "As I do not think the tax on carriages is a direct tax, it is unnecessary, at this time, for me to determine, whether this court, constitutionally possesses the power to declare an act of Congress void, on the ground of its being made contrary to, and in violation of, the Constitution; but if the court have such power, I am free to declare, that I will never exercise it, but in a very clear case." Chase was in the majority in Marbury v. Madison a few years later. This was before his impeachment and acquittal.
Do Murray v. Curlett!
I remember studying this case in Constitutional Law, truly an important case for what we know in the present as separation of powers...
John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court during the US Supreme Court Case
Marbury v. Madison and John Marshall was an American Lawyer and John Marshall was the 4th Chief Justice of the
US Supreme Court from February 4, 1801 to July 6, 1835 and John Marshall was Appointed by
President John Adams and John Marshall was Sworn In as the 4th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court on
February 4, 1801 at the Age of 45 years old and John Marshall was the 4th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court for
34 Years and from February 4, 1801 to July 6, 1835 was 34 Years and John Marshall was the
Longest Serving Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court in American History and John Marshall had a Job for
34 Years and Chief Justice John Marshall Died while on the Job and John Marshall was 79 years old when he Died and
John Marshall’s Cause of Death was a Stagecoach Accident, and Suffering severe injuries.
Can you do a video of the Taft court
Yes! But he should do videos on all 17 Chief Justices!
I like the idea of covering all of the Chief Justices.
@@iammrbeat I think the Taft Court would be particularly interesting as he was president before being Chief Justice. He's the only man in U.S. history to hold those two positions!
Reading old threads on a message board I'm on, reminded that Brown from Brown v Topeka died fairly recently. IMO, that was the most important case of the 20th century.
Yeah I agree
Possibly THE precedent making case
Mos def
The biggest question of all: can they sue the court to get the jobs they were promised in the court so they can listen to other people suing courts?
Another Awesome History Lesson.
Thanks :D
This video helped me pass my DBA, thanks!!!
Awesomeness
This is the most important Supreme Court case because well its the God of Supreme Court cases. We all know the cases that changed our culture, society and law but those wouldn't have been achieved if this case didn't exist.
Why didn't the Supreme Court decide the law unconstitutional after it was passed in 1789?
They needed a case to decide.
What is the most important Supreme Court case in American history? And why is it this one?
The Court ruled it had the power to overturn a law passed by Congress.
Jesus. The three questions they posed - They were not judges. They were philosophers!
Mr. Beat can you do a video on the fucking badass that is John Brown?
Ha! That would be a fun video.
Wait the court can determine the Constitution says that's unconstitutional
The court can't decide what's constitutional
Thanks for commenting
I would side with Marbury.
Why diddnt Moore or Cushing vote?
I don't know. That is a good question.
Conflict of interest? This is pure common law supreme court. Not the same as the Act of 1871 supreme courts.
Interesting video.
Dare I say it? Dare. Dare.
Not certain but I think Marshall's title was not Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.
What about North and South Dakota?
They are two great states!
And it still makes no sense
Lia Whitfield right 😂
What did the supreme court do before this case? If this has happened earlier theres no way the alien and sedition acts would've stuck around
nothing changes. We have the best Democracy money can buy...
Money can buy more these days. :(