• Cite/Export
  Cite/Export

  Copy a citation

  APA (6th ed.)

  

  Chicago (Author-Date, 15th ed.)

  

  Harvard (18th ed.)

  

  MLA (7th ed.)

  

  Turabian (6th ed.)

  

  Export a citation

  Export to RefWorks   Export to EndNote / Reference Manager   Export to EasyBib
  Export to EndNote / Reference Manager(non-Latin)   Cancel

  Note: Citations are based on reference standards. However, formatting rules can vary widely between applications and fields of interest or study. The specific requirements or preferences of your reviewing publisher, classroom teacher, institution or organization should be applied.
• Print
• E-mail
  E-mail

  All fields are required.

  The E-mail Address(es) field is required. Please enter recipient e-mail address(es).

  The E-mail Address(es) you entered is(are) not in a valid format. Please re-enter recipient e-mail address(es).

  You may send this item to up to five recipients.

  Enter recipient e-mail address(es): Separate up to five addresses with commas (,)

  The name field is required. Please enter your name.

  Enter your name: The subject field is required. Please enter the subject. Subject:

  The E-mail message field is required. Please enter the message.

  E-mail Message: I thought you might be interested in this item at http://citruslibrary.worldcat.org/oclc/1049567710 Title: Marbury v. Madison : the origins and legacy of judicial review Author: William Edward Nelson Publisher: Lawrence, Kan. : University Press of Kansas. C 2018. ISBN/ISSN: 9780700626533 0700626530 9780700626403 0700626409 OCLC:1049567710

  
  

  Please verify that you are not a robot.

  Cancel
• Share
• Permalink
  Permalink

  Copy this URL to link to this page:

More like this

Subjects

• Judicial review -- United States -- History.
• Separation of powers -- United States -- History.
• Judicial review.
• View all subjects

Similar Items

Marbury v. Madison : the origins and legacy of judicial review

Author:	William Edward Nelson
Publisher:	Lawrence, Kan. : University Press of Kansas. C 2018.
Series:	Landmark law cases and American society.
Edition/Format:	Print book : English : Second edition, revised and expandedView all editions and formats
Summary:	Présentation de l'éditeur : "On the surface, the case itself seems a minor one at best. William Marbury, a last-minute judicial appointee of outgoing Federalist president John Adams, demanded redress from the Supreme Court when his commission was not delivered. But Chief Justice John Marshall could clearly see the danger his demand posed for a weak court filled with Federalist judges. Wary of the Court's standing with the new Republican administration of Thomas Jefferson, Marshall hit upon a solution that was both principled and pragmatic. He determined that while Marbury was justified in his suit, the law on which his claim was based was in conflict with the Constitution. It was the first time that the Court struck down an act of Congress as unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine of judicial review that designates the Court as chief interpreter of the Constitution. Nelson relates the story behind Marbury and explains why it is a foundational case for understanding the Supreme Court. He reveals how Marshall deftly avoided a dangerous political confrontation between the executive and judicial branches by upholding the rule of law. Nelson also shows how Marshall managed to shore up the Court's prestige and power rather than have it serve partisan political agendas. Nelson expands upon his original historical analysis by providing a more complete and nuanced account of eighteenth-century constitutionalism and the early development of judicial review. The new material includes chapters on nullification of legislation in local courts, James Otis's articulation of the doctrine of judicial review in the Writs of Assistance Case, the use of this doctrine in response to the Stamp Act and Townshend Act, and the expansion of judicial review in the State Cases. This revised and expanded edition provides a fuller picture of colonial America and a richer understanding of Marshall's foundational decision."  Read more...