The legal case Marbury v. Madison Madison of February 24, 1803 initially declared an act of Congress illegal, consequently establishing the regulation of judicial review. The court's ruling, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, is considered one of the foundations of American constitutional law. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Weeks before Thomas Jefferson's inauguration as president in March 1801, the intermediary Federalist Congress appointed 16 new circuit judges in the Judiciary Act of 1801 and an unspecified number of new judges in the Organic Act that Adams continued to charge of Federalists in an attempt to save his party's control over the legal system and to frustrate the legislative agenda of Jefferson and his Republican Party. William Marbury, a pioneer of the Federalist Party of Maryland, did not receive his commission before Jefferson became president. Once in office, Jefferson coordinated his secretary of state, James Madison, to withhold the commission, and Marbury asked the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandate to urge Madison to act. Marbury and his lawyer, former Attorney General Charles Lee, argued that the commission's signature and seal completed the transaction and that the delivery was, in any case, a mere formality. But formality or not, without the actual piece of parchment, Marbury could not assume the duties of the office. Despite Jefferson's hostility, the court agreed to hear the case, Marbury v. Madison, in his February 1803 term. Some scholars have questioned whether Marshall should have recused himself from the case because of his prior service as Adams' secretary of state (1800–2001). ). Certainly, later judicial standards would have required recusal, but at the time only financial connections to a case led justices to step aside, as Marshall did in cases involving Virginia lands in which he had an interest. Republicans, always ready to criticize Marshall, did not even raise the question of the appropriateness of his participation in the case. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a custom essay directly on the issue presented by Marbury v. Madison can only be described as minor. By the time the court heard the case, the wisdom of Jefferson's desire to reduce the number of justices of the peace had been confirmed (and the Judiciary Act of 1801 had been repealed); Marbury's original term had nearly expired; and most people, Federalists and Republicans, considered the case questionable. But Marshall, despite the political difficulties involved, recognized that he had a perfect argument with which to expound a fundamental principle, judicial review, which would ensure the primary role of the Supreme Court in constitutional interpretation..