1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Karo-lina-s [1.5K]
3 years ago
5

Which statement is an explanation of the marshal court ruling in marbury v. Madison

History
1 answer:
stich3 [128]3 years ago
8 0

You didn't provide choices, but the probable answer is that <em>Marbury v. Madison</em> established the Supreme Court's right of judicial review -- the ability to declare a law or executive action unconstitutional.

More detail:

  • Judicial review refers to the courts' ability to review any law to see if it violates any existing law or any statute of a state constitution or the US Constitution.  On the federal level, Marbury v. Madison (1803) is considered the landmark case for the Supreme Court asserting its authority of judicial review, to strike down a law as unconstitutional.
  • It was sort of a roundabout way in which the principle of judicial review was asserted by the Supreme Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison. William Marbury had been appointed Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia by outgoing president John Adams -- one of a number of such last-minute appointments made by Adams.  When Thomas Jefferson came into office as president, he directed his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver many of the commission papers for appointees such as Marbury.  Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court directly to hear his case, as a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 had made possible.  The Court said that particular provision of the Judiciary Act was in conflict with Article III of the Constitution, and so they could not issue a specific ruling in Marbury's case (which they believe he should have won).  Nevertheless, in making their statement about the case, the Court established the principle of judicial review.
You might be interested in
Which group fueled the Atlanta Race Riots
Eva8 [605]
Newspaper and media outlets.

spreaded false accusations against African Americans
7 0
3 years ago
Describe what factor made germany's blitzkierg so different from the tactics used in ww1
Alex777 [14]
Blitzkrieg was so fast that the enemy didn't have time to prepare, whereas in WW1 where they fought in trenches, they would have to cross no-mans land and the enemy could see them coming
3 0
3 years ago
What are some potential benefits and potential costs of total war, and do the potential benefits ever outweigh the costs ?
dimaraw [331]

The concept of "total war" refers to a type of armed conflict that is bound by no rules or limitations in terms of who is being attacked, the weapons that are used or the elements of society that will be sacrificed to win it.

Engaging in this type of war can have some benefits, such as:

  • There is no need for the government to define its objectives clearly.
  • Because of it, there is no accountability between the government and its citizens, which gives them free reign of action.
  • Countries with a strong military can use their full power.

However, the costs far outweigh the benefits:

  • Increased cost of human lives, from all parties involved.
  • The destruction of all civil society.
  • Because civil society is so disrupted, government institutions are likely to collapse as well.
  • Extremely difficult recovery process, both politically as economically.
  • Complete depletion of the country's resources.
  • Violation of human rights and the laws of just war.
  • Closes the door to any peaceful solution.

There is rarely, if ever, a situation in which a total war provides benefits that would outweigh the costs of it, or that would not be achieved through some other means.

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
When did hitler die​
ExtremeBDS [4]

Answer:

April 30, 1945

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What is the meaning of the man in the areana speech
konstantin123 [22]

Answer:

the person who dares greatly

Explanation:

It is about acknowledging the person who dares greatly. Those vulnerable willing to scale new heights and put their reputation on the line. This is an ode to the individual who enters the arena and though they may stumble and fall, they know there is no greater service than to follow their passion and purpose.

5 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • Why were the Articles of Confederation replaced with the Constitution?
    7·2 answers
  • Take a look at these major themes of world history: 1. interaction between humans and the environment 2. development and interac
    11·1 answer
  • Which of the following does NOT describe Russia under Czar Nicolas II?
    14·1 answer
  • The Land Ordinance of 1785 affected slavery by
    15·2 answers
  • In what ways do you think members of congress might support and defend the us constitution
    15·1 answer
  • Major source of income in Georgia’s government
    15·1 answer
  • What is bolivar trying to convey about the powers of government in this passage ​
    12·1 answer
  • What is a civil war?
    12·2 answers
  • Can y’all please help me?
    12·1 answer
  • Chaldean king Nabopolassar led a revolt against the_______<br> to reclaim his kingdom.
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!