History, 02.02.2020 15:47 cgarnett5408

Which statement is an explanation of the marshal court ruling in marbury v. madison

Answers: 1

Show answers

Answers

Answer from: shrinu

You didn't provide choices, but the probable answer is that Marbury v. Madison established the Supreme Court's right of judicial review -- the ability to declare a law or executive action unconstitutional.

More detail:

Judicial review refers to the courts' ability to review any law to see if it violates any existing law or any statute of a state constitution or the US Constitution. On the federal level, Marbury v. Madison (1803) is considered the landmark case for the Supreme Court asserting its authority of judicial review, to strike down a law as unconstitutional.It was sort of a roundabout way in which the principle of judicial review was asserted by the Supreme Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison. William Marbury had been appointed Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia by outgoing president John Adams -- one of a number of such last-minute appointments made by Adams. When Thomas Jefferson came into office as president, he directed his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver many of the commission papers for appointees such as Marbury. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court directly to hear his case, as a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 had made possible. The Court said that particular provision of the Judiciary Act was in conflict with Article III of the Constitution, and so they could not issue a specific ruling in Marbury's case (which they believe he should have won). Nevertheless, in making their statement about the case, the Court established the principle of judicial review.

Answer from: Quest

1- in bradbury's fahrenheit 451, all books are banned and burned upon discovery. in the nazi germany, books considered to be subversive to the regime would be burned to keep the population from generating ideologies that could challenge nazism.

2- was bradbury correct in his literal interpretation of “where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people.”? in some way, yes. when knowledge is not only limited, but also controlled, the people tied to it are led to their demise. just like in the novel, people in nazi germany who owned subversive books were punished not only by the burning of their property, but also by the discrimination that followed after such a public form of consequence. if a person was seen being confiscated subversive books, they may be considered as an ally to the jews, which meant pretty much the same as being the enemy back then. because of the extreme exclusion and suffering that followed this punishment, it's almost like dying a slow death.

in this way, the phrase “where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people.” is both literal and figurative.

explanation:

mark brainliest and have a great day!

Answer from: Quest

a big one is

to appoint and regulate officers of the land and naval forces,

which caused much controversy ending the articles