This is the area of the lesson plan template that provides a format for the following contents: Introduction, Objectives, Materials, Procedures, and Assessment.
Social Studies > General Social Studies > Civics
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
Judicial Review—Marbury v. Madison1803Class Length: 2-3 Class Meetings Objectives:Students will be able to:
Describe the significance of the Marbury v. Madison court case of 1803 as it relates to the court system today.
Read important documents with a critical eye.
Define the term judicial review.
Critically analyze a political cartoon.
Materials:-Copies of Anti-Federalist 78-79and The Power of the Judicial Branch: The Federalist Number 78 (cited reference #1)-Copies of Judicial Branch political cartoon (cited reference #3)-Copies of the Judiciary Act of 1789 (cited reference #4)Terms:-Judicial Review-James Madison-William Marbury-John Marshall-John Adams-Thomas Jefferson-Federalist-Anti-federalist-Judiciary Act of 1789Procedures:Teacher will introduce the following scenario and questions to the class:-The Congress passes a law that says all land-owning citizens must use all of their land or else it will be repossessed by the government. Citizens have 6 months to comply.The president signs this law and asks the military to enforce it.
-Questions to Consider: oDo the people any say in this decision?oThe United States judicial system is designed to have a variety of courts review the constitutionality of the decisions of the Executive and Legislative Branches, with the final decision resting with the nine appointed judges (8 appointed Justices and 1 Chief Justice).Do you think this is a fair system?Should nine people determine the fate of millions?Why/Why not?oHow would our government work without a system of judicial review? Teacher will briefly explain the Marbury v. Madison case of 1803 to the class (For instructional assistance teacher can refer to http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/9.htm for instructional notes):-Famous case that established the concept of judicial review; after Thomas Jefferson was elected President in 1800, following the John Adams administration.-In opposition to the Jefferson administration’s ideals, outgoing Federalist President Adams sought to keep federalist power in the government by appointing several federalist judges for life. These judges were approved by the Senate, all commissioned by then outgoing Secretary of State John Marshall, -All judges except for one were commissioned; the one was William Marbury who was restricted commission by President Jefferson.Marbury brought his grievances to the Supreme Court, demanding the new Secretary of State James Madison commission into judgeship. -The Supreme Court made a 4-0 decision. In his new role of Chief Justice, John Marshall made a ruling that said that Marbury was entitled to his commission.Marshall noted, however, that a law that gave the Supreme Court the power to rule on the case was unconstitutional, thus negating the Supreme Court to give Madison the authority to commission Marbury.
The teacher will distribute The Power of the Judicial Branch: The Federalist Number 78, placing particular focus on the following passages (adapted from http://www.landmarkcases.org/marbury/home.html):-"The judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution . . . [it] may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."oStudents will write about the author’s meaning of this quotation. -"For there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the executive and legislative powers."oStudents will explain how this quotation relates to the United States’ system of government.oWhy do you think judges have permanent tenure?oWhat attitude does this document convey about the Supreme Court of the United States? The teacher will distribute the Anti-Federalist 78-79, and have students consider the following questions (adapted from http://www.landmarkcases.org/marbury/home.html):
What differences are described between the court systems of Great Britain and the United States?
Comparing this document with the “Federalist Number 78,” what are the critical areas on which the authors agree and disagree?
Students will imagine that the Anti-Federalist proposals had been adopted instead of the Federalist ideas.How would the United States de different today?How would the United States be different today if the proposals outlined in the Anti-Federalist had been accepted? Students will receive text on the Judiciary Act of 1789, (referencedand adapted from http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/8.htm) playing particular attention to sections 1 and 13, and the United States Constitution, paying particular attention to Article III.Students will compare and contrast these documents, and consider the following questions:-U.S.Constitution, Article III, Section 1: The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.-U.S. Constitution, Article III,Section 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;-to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;- to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;- to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;- to Controversies between two or more States;- between a State and Citizens of another State;-between Citizens of different States;- between Citizens of the same State claiming Land under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.oUnder the Constitution, who has the power to create the court system?oDoes the Congress have the authority to change the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?