Marbury v. Madison

[TheSolja504]

thumbs up for Mr. Devries!!

[XxlovelesslostxX]

this video might be a good video, by my government class is doing a video guide for it and it is sooooooooooooooooooooooooo boreing. oh and 2nd from Mr. h's 2nd period government class

[RightTurn45]

1st from Mr. H's 2nd period Government class

[boydferd]

hi garret

[boydferd]

Your moms Maddness

[shinichiBLUE]

Marshall is pretty awesome lol

[tommyhendo]

Thanks for posting. My high school teacher showed us this 20 years ago and I've been trying to find it for my students

[msm0993]

I'll be the first of Mr. Devries' 5th period class to leave a comment.

[matthewrf54]

Marshall = Awesome

[TarasBulyba23]

Who had to watch this for DCD

[japjmp47]

nice unibrow Marbury

[anythingnew]

That is so cool.  I wish I was a judge.

[PiotrIM2]

youtube beats 2 hours of lecture and 80 pages of reading. if you know the background you only need to watch after 22min mark.

[Guevaristas]

a major landmark US decision.

New Zealand courts have no ability to review and strike down unconstitutional legislation, obviously because there is no written constition here.

Some have argued there exists a residual inherent, or assumed common law jurisdiction to do so. However, this argument remains purely academic.

Perhaps one day, if the NZ parliament were to enact extreme legislation, a court of superior jurisdiction might be forced to rule on it.

[mazimi89]

marbury is rocking that unibrow...

[b6721]

"Is it madness Mr. President?"

"Madness? THIS IS THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH!"

[stantheman42069]

lmfao wish they said that instead

[danceonyourhead]

yay poli sci classes! videos like these really are amazing for that purpose... I'm doing the same thing right now, only mine's in about 3 hours!

[darlingnose]

yay for this vid! it has officially helped me with the poli sci test i have to take tomorrow morning.

[Lycan220]

If Marbury Vs Madison didnt happen, the power of judicial review would have come up again in Gibbons vs Ogden.

[juanmsj]

Lo que nadie sabe es que tanto Marbury como Madison eran gays, y a su vez, Madison estaba enamorado de Jefferson. Esto fue lo que desato el conflicto. El caso en verdad deberia llamarse "Marbury y Madison por siempre", for ever... como oportunamente lo dijo Adams.

[SpottedTiger89]

BAAAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!! OMG! AHAHAHAH! Too funny, man... too funny!

[motownmaniax]

Every American should watch this vid and read the actual decision (it can easily be found on the net).

For all the faults of democracy, our system is still the best the world has ever seen. God Bless America.

[laferrerrivera]

I second ur comment, it may have it's faults but it's still the best system till this day.

[Julian13084]

this was great ! Im going to pass Con Law now!!!

[jaex26]

why dont u pass out condoms instead to get rid of people like u

[roqueuriel]

The supreme court didn't have jurisdiction to see the case. Wich means, they didnt have the power to decide the case. Although they thought that the commisions were rightfully theirs the couldnt do anything about it.

[kgj08]

eh.. the Court only didn't have the jurisdiction because Marshall said that Section 13 of the Judiciary Act was unconstitutional. Most scholars agree that it wasn't and the Court did in fact have jurisdiction. Marshall was just trying to avoid a heated political battle.

[FullMetalSuck]

Oh yes! this video brings me great joy, it makes my belly all rumbley umbeley

[murtari]

Nowhere does the Constitution say which Branch has judicial review of the Constitution. It does, however, enumerate only the powers that gov't may have. The power of judicial review was stolen from The People by this court; in effect making SCOTUS a dispicable tyrant that rules from the Bench On High. Great work if you can get it, and let's see...who's eligible? That's right: Lawyers. Lawyers produce NOTHING! Who regulates lawyers? The ABA: MORE lawyers. No wonder Congress is screwed

[kbguy04]

If the power of judicial review were given to the people, what good would the constitution be? The constitution was written to protect the nation from the idiots that sit in Congress. Although some Supreme Court Justices "legislate from the bench," their actual job is to apply the Constitution as it was written, not as the people feel it should be now. The Constitution was written to impede change.

[Waynestr92]

The ability to explain such a complex subject in a visual and detailed manner such as this is one of great manner. It not only presents a visual reinactment of the event, but also a different teaching tool to be used for students such as myself. I encourage the makers of this video to continue to use their gift. I thank the Lord for your wonderful gift, and pray for its continued helpfulness. Thank you once more and God bless :)

[pompodore]

I think the justices should have got their commissions

[lsatep]

No, the Judiciary Act of 1789 which gave the power to the courts to hear a case on and issue such a commision flys in the face of article 3 section 2 of the constitution as the Supreme court only has original jurisdiction over cases involving embassadors and what not. Therefore, because the Judiciary Act is at odds with the language of the constitution, Marshall was right to stike the act as UNCONSTITUTIONAL

[Aye90125]

Actually, Chief Justice Marshall said Yes.

His ruling regarding the constitutionality was correct, However:

After the case, he urged Jefferson to grant them, but the President decided to be a douche about it and continued to ignore them.

You failed to address the comment entirely.

[madisonscholar]

This is an incredible dramaization, though I'm not sure of the hairstyles being entirely accurate, at least from what I've seen from portraits. Oh, well:) Fantastic anyway:) Thanks for posting!

[bonaymo]

this is great!!! those in the legal profession should view this video.

[DaR4Buff]

Thank you kindly John Marshall. Thank you Public Resource for posting this! Funny and informative too!