v. Madison is an essential decision in American political system, in 1800
President John Adams a Federalist was leaving office. Thomas Jefferson a
Republican-democrat was taking over the presidential office. In order to keep
Federalist power in the courts Adams sought to appoint and expand the number of
judgeships in the judiciary, they passed the Midnight Judges Act. Adams
Nominates candidates and getting them approved by the Senate. John Marshall is
currently secretary of state he was in charge of delivering the commissions for
the Federalist judges, but he ran out of time when Jefferson took office. Some
of the undelivered commissions Jefferson had James Madison his appointed
Secretary of state to not deliver the commissions because they did not want
federalist judges. One of these judges was Marbury, a federalist, Marbury tried
to use the wrist of mandamus to mandate the supreme court in order to get his
commission as a federal judge. John Marshall who is now the supreme court chief
justice and is a federalist wanted to give Marbury his commission but did not
want to get the new administration with anti-federalist against him. Congress
suspends the supreme court for a year to show that if Marshall went against the
Republican democrats, there was going to be consequences. As stated in the
article Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court, “The Court ruled that Marbury
was entitled to his commission, but that according to the Constitution, the
Court did not have the authority to require Madison to deliver the commission
to Marbury in this case. They found that the Judiciary Act of 1789 conflicted
with the Constitution because it gave the Supreme Court more authority then it
was given under the Constitution.” (p.2) Giving way that the Supreme Court does
not have the power to mandate the commission, that the Judiciary Act of 1789 is
unconstitutional, and it conflicts with the Constitution, which was the supreme
law of the land. Marshall gave the Supreme Court the power to determine and
interpret what is and is not constitutional, known as Judicial Review.

power of Judiciary review is most often used to strike down state governments;
then it has been for federal government. While Judicial Review is not given to
the Supreme Court by the constitution, it is an implied power for the Supreme
Court to be able to do its job. This is a form of checks and balances of powers
in the United States. Another case in which Judicial review was used to
determine the constitutionally of law was in Miranda v. Arizona (1966) in which
Ernesto Miranda was arrested for the kidnapping and rape of an
eighteen-year-old girl in which Miranda signed a confession to the charges that
he had already given verbally. Miranda was not provided or made aware of his
constitutional rights that he did not have to incriminate himself and that he
had the right to legal representation. He was convicted, in an appeal to the
Supreme Court, they found it unconstitutional under the Fifth and Sixth
Amendment. That a person in custody must be clearly informed of their rights
before interrogation unless the suspect waived his rights after knowing them.
Miranda was released with the charges dropped from this outcome. In the Miranda
Rights are established “The Supreme Court overturned his conviction, but
Miranda was retried and convicted in October 1966 anyway, despite the relative
lack of evidence against him.” (p.4)