What is legal Eagle45...
I made the following comment:
Marbury, of course, refers to the case of Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), but more about that after I post LegalEagle45's response to the above.
Problem,
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) is a very important case in Supreme Court jurisprudence. One doesn't need to go very far to find that out. The first result in my google search was:
Marbury v. Madison - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) is a landmark case in United States law and in the history of law worldwide. It formed the basis for the exercise ...
a little further down in the results one finds:www.lawnix.com/cases/marbury-madison.html
Facts, issue, holding, and rule of law in the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison – Case Brief Summary.
I made a
post about this case earlier on in response to:
An anonymous idiot, said:
You mention Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), quite a bit.
And for good reason. But anon missed this post: An Interesting Factoid. He also doesn't have an understanding of the fundamentals of Constitutional law.
The problem, LegalEagle45, is that this case is the first one studied in Law School Constitutional Law classes for precisely the reasons I gave in the
aforementioned post:
Marbury is a landmark case in United States law and in the history of law worldwide. It formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution. It was also the first time in Western history a court invalidated a law by declaring it "unconstitutional", a process called judicial review. The landmark decision helped define the "checks and balances" of the American form of government.
Since it defined judicial review, it also provided guidelines for that review--the most important of which is the one I keep mentioning--that "It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect".
According to Marbury, One cannot presume that any language in the Constitution is mere surplusage--is entirely without meaning.
Sorta sad statement about the US educational system that you have to get your civics lessons from a Brit!
LegalEagle, while sounding as if he knows something about the law demonstrates that he does not have one of the extreme basics of US Constitutional law and Supreme Court Jurisprudence--knowledge of the case
Marbury v. Madison,
5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803).
That is the rough equivalent of not knowing what a stop sign looks like or which side of the road you drive on if you are able to drive a car.
Perhaps, this is why he was consistently making my argument for me through his ignorance.
Yes, LegalEagle, you just made a goal--
FOR THE OTHER TEAM
And you can't stop doing it.
While this is the most egregious of his mistakes, if one is at all familiar with the law, legal practise, and legal method, one would see that LegalEagle45 consistently got it wrong from citing cases and authorities which supported my case if they didn't just fail to refute it.
I should also add, as a landmark supreme court case,
Marbury is actual legal precedent and LegalEagle45's George Mason quote is pure blather. Again, LegalEagle provides a quote which doesn't really make his point, but he keeps hoping that if he quotes lots and lots of people, it might snow the unwary into thinking he has some idea of what he is talking about.
As I said after reading his first response--thanks for making my case for me.
But in this instance, LegalEagle45, you really fucked it.
You fucked it royally.
Whenever I hear someone parrot "individual right, individual right, individual right", it reminds me of this:
Substitute "individual right" for "Brawndo".
One more nail in LegalEagle's coffin:
Marbury v. Madison (1803) Marbury v. Madison, arguably the most important case in Supreme Court history, was the first U.S. Supreme Court case to apply the principle of
"judicial review" -- the power of federal courts to void acts of Congress in conflict with the Constitution. Written in 1803 by
Chief Justice John Marshall, the decision played a key role in making the Supreme Court a separate branch of government on par with Congress and the executive.
And another from
Time:
It has been 10 years since the concluding chapter of the 2000 election. On Dec. 12, 2000, the Supreme Court decided Bush v. Gore — just one decision in a long line of important cases. TIME takes a look at other landmark rulings