Marbury V. Madison And Judicial Review

In Robert Lowry Clinton’s book Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review, the author describes the controversial ideal of judicial review that became a major power delegated to the Supreme Court following the case known as Marbury v. Madison. Clinton does this by tracing the origins of judicial review that preceded the court case, as well as describing the institution through the court case itself and its influence on future Supreme Court cases. Despite the court’s now famous history, Clinton claims in his book that there existed before, during and after the decision in Marbury v. Madison a generally agreed upon notion of judicial review in constitutional matters. Clinton believes that the Supreme Court case known as Marbury v. Madison was significant

With the Marshall Court, we can see how Chief Justice Marshall was able to establish his presence throughout the court while ensuring that opposers to the court, one such being Thomas Jefferson, didn’t interfere in the court’s comings and goings. This was performed to success, as multiple presidents exhibited their admiration and respect for the court. One such president was Andrew Jackson who surprisingly admitted to the power of judicial review, asserting “it was as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill presented… of the supreme judges when it may be brought…for judicial decision” (Clinton

For example, the comparisons Clinton made between presidents Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln were thought provoking enough to find the argument captivating. Moreover, the author’s types of sources used was a perfect blend of both primary and secondary sources, contributing to the validity of the argument, as well as showing the wide range of information Clinton was able to pull to support his argument. Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review was a thought provoking that benefits from its source material as well as the author’s analysis, but suffers to some degree. To explain, a central theme to the book, one can assume, is the case of Marbury v. Madison. However, Clinton seems to brush over the details of the case itself, instead taking a broader approach on the impact of judicial review. While this provides for an interesting analysis, Clinton’s book could have further benefited from this in keeping his audience further into the book and the author’s