New justice positions were created before President Adams left office. He appointed justices with a federal ideology, but the appointments were never fully approved by Congress. One appointee, William Marbury, sued after being denied his position. In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court ruled that while Marbury had a right to his appointment, the court could not force its issuance due to limits on its jurisdiction set by the Constitution. This established the Supreme Court's ability to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional.

2.  New justice positions were created in the Supreme
Court right before President Adams presidency was
over.
 He appointed justices with a federal ideology
 The last minute appointments were never fully
approved.
 Because the positions were never approved entirely
by Congress one of the last minute appointed
justices' (Justice Marbury) filed a lawsuit for being
denied his postion.

3.  Per the Judiciary act of 1789 Marbury ordered
a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court
under Section 13 of the bill

4.  In Article III Section II there is a specific outline in
where the Supreme Court has appellate and
Original jurisdiction the Judiciary Act of 1798
section 13 violated that part of the constitution
when Congress extended those powers in the
Act.
 Article VI was violated because Congress placed
a legislation that went against the constitution
but in Article VI Supremacy Clause it states the
Constitution is above any piece of legislation
passed by Congress.

5.  Can Marbury be allowed his appointment?
 Can the Marbury file his complaint at the
Supreme Court?
 Can the Supreme Court look at the
constitutionality of laws?
 The problem with Marbury filing a lawsuit to
the Supreme Court was that per the Judiciary
Act he was asking the Supreme Court to issue
a writ of mandamus.

6.  The case made it to the court on March
2,1801
 The case started days before President
Jefferson was inaugurated as president.

7.  It was decided that Marbury was allowed to file a
lawsuit to the Supreme Court and should have
been given his appointment per the Constitution
 The Supreme Court could not issue a writ of
mandamus
 The Supreme Court can look at the
constitutionality of laws
 Citizens can have more of their rights protected
and always get rid of legislation that they
believe is not benefiting the public.

8. MARBURY v. MADISON. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 04
March 2012. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1803/1803_0>.
Lawnix. "Marbury v. Madison – Case Brief Summary." Marbury v. Madison – Case
Brief Summary. Lawnix. Web. 08 Mar. 2012.
<http://www.lawnix.com/cases/marbury-madison.html>.