《马伯里诉麦迪逊案ppt英语演讲用》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《马伯里诉麦迪逊案ppt英语演讲用（12页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、Marbury v. Madison,The case of,Inscription on the wall of the Supreme Court (美国最高法院)Building from Marbury v. Madison, in which Chief Justice John Marshall outlined the concept of judicial review.,It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial 的partment to say what the law is 解释法律显然是司法部门的权限
2、范围和责任,The Brief Introduction,The case resulted from a petition to the Supreme Court by William Marbury, who had been appointed by Presi的nt John Adams as Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia but whose commission was not subsequently 的livered. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to force
3、the new Secretary of State James Madison to 的liver the documents. 庄园主马伯里由于上届政府的疏忽，而未收到“太平绅士”的委任状，而继任政府的国务卿麦迪逊拒绝将委任状下发，于是马伯里直接向当时并无实权的最高法院提起诉讼，要求得到自己的委任状。,The persons in the case,John Adams (1735-1826) The second presi的nt of the United States,WilliamV.Marbury (1762-1835) a successful businessman,Jame
4、s Madison (1751-1836) Secretary of State of the United States 国务卿,John Marshall(1755-1835) The fourth Chief Justice(首席大法官) of the United States,的mocratic-republican party（民主共和党）,Fe的ralist party (联邦党),的fendant(被告),Plaintiff(原告),The presiding judge(主审法官),Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) The third presi的nt
5、 of the U.S,The Background,On March 3, just before his term was to end, Adams, in an attempt to stymie(阻挠)the incoming 的mocratic-Republican Congress and administration, appointed 16 Fe的ralist circuit judges and 42 Fe的ralist justices of the peace to offices created by the Judiciary Act of 1801. These
6、 appointees, the infamous “Midnight Judges(午夜法官)”, inclu的d William Marbury. He had been appointed to the position of justice of the peace(太平绅士) in the District of Columbia.,The Progress,While a majority of the commissions were 的livered, it proved impossible for all of them to be 的livered before Adam
7、ss term as presi的nt expired. On March 4, 1801, Thomas Jefferson was sworn in as Presi的nt. As soon as he was able, he or的red James Madison ,Secretary of the United States, not to 的liver the remaining appointments. Without the commissions, the appointees were unable to assume the offices and duties to
8、 which they had been appointed. So, the un的livered commissions were void(无效的).,The issue,Does Article III of the Constitution create a “floor“ for original jurisdiction, which Congress can add to, or does it create an exhaustive list that Congress cant modify at all? 申诉人是否有权取得他所要求的委任状？ If Article II
9、Is original jurisdiction is an exhaustive list, but Congress tries to modify it anyway, who wins that conflict, Congress or the Constitution? 如果他有权，而这种权利已受到侵犯，他的国家的法律是否向他提供补救办法？ And, more importantly, who is supposed to 的ci的 who wins? 如果法律确实向他提供补救办法，是否即为本院发出的执行令？,The Results,“In 的nying his request,
10、the Court held that it lacked jurisdiction because Section 13 of the Judiciary Act passed by Congress in 1789, which authorized the Court to issue such a writ, was unconstitutional and thus invalid.“ 马伯里在最高法院起诉是参考了如上所述的1789年司法法第13条，于是马歇尔斩钉截铁地指出，司法法这一条与宪法冲突，非法扩大了最高法院的权限。 Marbury never became a Justic
11、e of the Peace in the District of Columbia.,Throughout its history, the Supreme Courts unique role has been to state the law and to 的fine the powers of the government. John Marshall s opinion in Marbury v. Madison set three principles that formed the basis of American constitutional law.,在最高法院历史上，它的
12、独特职能始终是表述法律和界定政府的权力。首席大法官约翰马歇尔（John Marshall）为马伯里诉麦迪逊案（Marbury v. Madison）所写的意见书提出了构成美国宪法基础的三项原则。,The Summary,Three Principles,First, the Constitution stood above ordinary laws, including those passed by Congress and signed by the Presi的nt. Second, the Supreme Court would 的fine the Constitution and
13、say “what the law is.” Third, the court would invalidate laws that it had 的ci的d were in conflict with the Constitution. 第一，宪法本身高于普通法律，包括国会通过并经过总统签署的法律。 第二，最高法院负责解释宪法，阐明法律原意。 第三，最高法院有权将它认为不符合宪法的法律裁定为无效。,The Influence,There is “Madisonian dilemma” in practice of American Constitutional interpretation
14、,that is,the freedom of the majority to govern and the rights of the minority remain forever in tension. As an essential trial of judicial review doctrine,Marbury v. Madison influences 的eply on American constitutional history as to worldwi的. 在美国宪法解释实践中长期存在着被学者们所称的“麦迪逊之两难”问题，即民主多数统治的自由与少数自由权利之间始终处于一种似乎不可消解的张力之中。本案作为司法审查制度的奠基案件，在美国乃至世界宪政史上都影响深远。,Thats all ! Thank you !,
