Marburyv.MadisonThecaseTheFactsAttheDecemberTerm,1801,WilliamMarbury,DennisRamsay,RobertTownsendHooe,andWilliamHarper,bytheircounsel,severallymovedthecourtforaruletoJamesMadison,SecretaryofStateoftheUnitedStates,toshowcausewhyamandamusshouldnotissuecommandinghimtocausetobedeliveredtothemrespectivelytheirseveralcommissionsasjusticesofthepeaceintheDistrictofColumbia.

1801年12月，威廉·馬伯里、丹尼·拉姆塞、羅伯特·湯森和威廉·哈伯分別通過(guò)律師對(duì)美國(guó)國(guó)務(wù)卿詹姆斯·麥迪遜提起訴訟，要求最高法院裁決麥迪遜就他拒不發(fā)放馬伯里等人就認(rèn)哥倫比亞地區(qū)地方執(zhí)法官的委任狀一事說(shuō)明理由。TheFactsThismotionwassupportedbyaffidavitsofthefollowingfacts:thatnoticeofthismotionhadbeengiventoMr.Madison;thatMr.Adams,thelatePresidentoftheUnitedStates,nominatedtheapplicantstotheSenatefortheiradviceandconsenttobeappointedjusticesofthepeaceoftheDistrictofColumbia;thattheSenateadvisedandconsentedtotheappointments;此項(xiàng)請(qǐng)求的依據(jù)如下：發(fā)放委任狀的通知已經(jīng)送達(dá)到了麥迪遜手上；美國(guó)前總統(tǒng)亞當(dāng)斯向參議院提名馬伯里等人就認(rèn)哥倫比亞地區(qū)的地方執(zhí)法官，參議院討論并通過(guò)了這項(xiàng)任命。TheFactsthatcommissionsindueformweresignedbythesaidPresidentappointingthemjustices,andthatthesealoftheUnitedStateswasindueformaffixedtothesaidcommissionsbytheSecretaryofState;thattheapplicantshaverequestedMr.Madisontodeliverthemtheirsaidcommissions,whohasnotcompliedwiththatrequest;thattheapplicantshavemadeapplicationtoMr.MadisonasSecretaryofStateoftheUnitedStatesathisoffice,forinformationwhetherthecommissionsweresignedandsealedasaforesaid;亞當(dāng)斯總統(tǒng)正式簽署了委任他們?yōu)榈胤綀?zhí)法官的委任狀并由國(guó)務(wù)卿正式地在委任狀上加蓋了美國(guó)國(guó)印。馬伯里等人要求沒(méi)有按規(guī)定發(fā)放委任狀的麥迪遜國(guó)務(wù)卿送出他們所述的委任狀。馬伯里等人已經(jīng)向國(guó)務(wù)卿辦公室申請(qǐng)了說(shuō)明委任狀是否被登記并簽章的信息。TheFactsthatexplicitandsatisfactoryinformationhasnotbeengiveninanswertothatinquiry,eitherbytheSecretaryofStateoranyofficerintheDepartmentofState;thatapplicationhasbeenmadetothesecretaryoftheSenateforacertificateofthenominationoftheapplicants,andoftheadviceandconsentoftheSenate,whohasdeclinedgivingsuchacertificate對(duì)于以上質(zhì)詢，沒(méi)有任何政府官員給予明確且令人滿意的回復(fù)。申請(qǐng)還被送交給了參議院秘書(shū)來(lái)證明馬伯里等人已經(jīng)因參議院的同意和批準(zhǔn)而得到任命。但參議院秘書(shū)拒絕給予證明。TheFactsMr.JacobWagnerandMr.DanielBrent,whohadbeensummonedtoattendthecourt,andwererequiredtogiveevidence,Thecourtorderedthewitnessestobesworn,andtheiranswerstakeninwriting,butinformedthemthat,whenthequestionswereasked,theymightstatetheirobjectionstoansweringeachparticularquestion,iftheyhadany.Mr.Lincoln,whohadbeentheactingSecretaryofState,wascalledupontogivetestimony.Heobjectedtoanswering.Thequestionswereputinwriting.雅各·瓦格納和丹尼·布倫特先生被傳喚出庭并按要求提供證據(jù)。法庭要求證人宣誓并告知他們?cè)诨卮饐?wèn)題是可以提出異議。曾代理過(guò)國(guó)務(wù)卿的林肯先生應(yīng)邀出庭作證。所有的問(wèn)題都已經(jīng)記錄在案。TheissuesWhethertheSupremeCourtcanawardthewritofmandamusinanycase.WhetheritwilllietoaSecretaryofState,inanycasewhatever.Whether,inthepresentcase,theCourtmayawardamandamustoJamesMadison,SecretaryofState.Thesummary這是一個(gè)關(guān)于類似于行政訴訟的案件，馬伯里請(qǐng)求最高法院依據(jù)1789年《司法法》向美國(guó)國(guó)務(wù)卿下達(dá)強(qiáng)制令要求其發(fā)放馬伯里等人的委任書(shū)，而主審法官馬歇爾卻由此引發(fā)了一個(gè)極有價(jià)值的憲法問(wèn)題，即憲法與一般法律發(fā)生沖突，應(yīng)適用哪部法律，以及誰(shuí)有權(quán)做出決定的問(wèn)題。馬歇爾認(rèn)為憲法是優(yōu)先的、最高的法律；就具體的案件司法機(jī)關(guān)具有決定適用憲法、認(rèn)定違背憲法的法律無(wú)效的權(quán)力，從而開(kāi)創(chuàng)了美國(guó)司法機(jī)關(guān)審查憲法立法的先河。It'saboutasimilartotheadministrativelitigationcase,MaBoLiappealedtotheSupremeCourtbasisin1789thejudiciallawtothesecretaryofstatedemandsofitsissuedaninjunctionissuedMaBoLiwaitforapersonappointsandpresidingjudgeMarshallwascausedbyaveryvaluableconstitutionalissues,namelyconstitutionandlawingeneraltheconflict,shouldapplytowhichlegal,andwhoshallhavetherighttomakedecisionproblem.Marshallsaystheconstitutionispreferred,thehighestlegal,Specificcas