Write a Supreme Court brief about a case.

Use CHAMBERS V. UNITED STATES (2008) as the case:

1. Title: Write down the name of the case. Also cite it with the year and publisher.
2. Parties Involved: Who are the two parties involved, and who is suing who.
3. Issue: Write one sentence about what the issue is about, and what is trying to be resolved.
4. Facts of the Case: State the facts of the case. Write a summary paragraph that explains what were the events that led the case being heard before the Supreme Court. You must state the pertinent facts and understand how the story was created. Write it in such a manner that anyone can understand it simply by reading what you wrote (and do not copy and paste!!!!)
5. Laws, issues, and merits of the case: These are the legal issues that the Court must face. In this part, list,write, or explain which parts of the Constitution are being addressed. IF it deals with a federal law, write the law. Or if it deals with a state law or state action, then include it here and explain its significance.
6. Holding: What the Supreme Court ruled. It should be in one sentence, using words such as supported, affirmed, denied, or threw out. IT should also include which side the Court favored, if it favored any side at all
7. Judgment: Here is the most important part of the brief: explain why the Court ruled the way it did. It should be a brief summation of the Court’s decision, and also how the Court reached this decision. Use quotes from the case to support what the Supreme Court ruled.
8. Impact of the case: Explain how this case affected American society, politics, and/or American culture. The explanation should be able to show how the case changed (or did not) America, and why it is important to know.

Here is an example, using the Marbury decision:

Title: Marbury v Madison (5 U.S. 137, 1803)

Parties involved: William Marbury, petitioner, and James Madison, Secretary of State, respondent.

Issue: Does William Marbury have the right to his commission to become Justice of the Peace, and can the Supreme Court force Madison to issue his commision?

Facts of the Case: At the end of the Adams administration, President Adams packed the federal judiciary with many Federalist supporters, which included William Marbury. William Marbury was to become Justice of the Peace for Washington D.C., but never received his commission. When Thomas Jefferson entered office in 1801, President Jefferson ordered James Madison not to deliver the commission to Marbury. Marbury then filed a lawsuit against Madison in the Supreme Court, using a clause in the Judiciary Act of 1789, allowing him to sue Madison in the Supreme Court.

Laws, and merits of the case: Marbury was using the Judiciary Act of 1789 to find relief, in which he would receive his commission from Madison through a writ of mandamus by the Supreme Court.

Holding: In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Marbury, but stated it could not issue a writ of mandamus because Marbury failed to follow the legal procedures of filing a case before the Supreme Court.

Judgment: The Supreme Court stated in its opinion that Marbury should have received his commission from Madison. However, the method that Marbury did it was wrong. He had used a clause in the Judiciary Act of 1789 to take his case directly to the Supreme Court. Marbury had used the clause to gain original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court. In this case, Chief Justice Marshall stated, it should be argued first in the lower courts, and then appealed to the higher courts. Because Marbury used the Judiciary Act of 1789 in order to gain relief from the Court, that clause was in conflict with Article III of the Constitution. The Constitution was the supreme Law of the land, and when a law conflicts with the Constitution, the law is null and void. As CHief Justice Marshall wrote: “It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. … If then, the courts are to regard the constitution, and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature, [then] the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply”. Chief Justice Marshall set the precedent for Judicial review.

There were no dissenting opinions.

Impact of the Case: the first instance of the use of judicial review. By declaring parts of the Judiciary Act of 1789 violating the Constitution, the Supreme Court struck down a law, declaring it unconstitutional. More importantly, it created a legal precedent that gave the Supreme Court power that could be equal to the other two branches of government.

After this decision, the other two branches of government, and basically the nation, would respect the concept of judicial review as a valid principle in the Constitution. It still stands as the most important power the federal courts have in public policymaking.