U.S. Supreme Court
5 U.S. 137
FACTS
∆ fails to give π a commission.
PROCEDURE
π seeks writ of mandamus from court to compel ∆ to give commission.
ISSUE
1. Does π have a right to the commission?
2. Does US law allow him to remedy the injury?
3. Is the remedy a mandamus from the court?
HOLDING
Yes, Yes, no.
ANALYSIS
1. President signed commission and seal was affixed. That makes it official. Therefore, depriving π of the commission violates a right.
2. When legislature imposes certain duties on ∆, court can compel ∆ to fulfill those duties when the affect citizens. Therefore, person injured by ∆ can recover by law.
3. Court should stay out of affairs of officers appointed by president. It is what the officer did in the case that makes it proper or improper to issue mandamus. Judicial Act of 1789 says its ok to is-sue mandamus to officer’s of government. Under Constitution, court must either have appellate or original jurisdiction. No appellate because no previous decision. And apparently under original jurisdiction, issue of mandamus isn’t warranted by consitution. In this situation, Judicial Act allows court to choose between a rule in the constitution and another rule it deems superior. But allowing court to disregard consitution is inconsistent. Court wishes to discharge Judiciary Act of 1789 because it is inconsistent with Constitution. Judicial Review: court can review legislature’s decision and invalidate unconstitutional laws.
5 U.S. 137
FACTS
∆ fails to give π a commission.
PROCEDURE
π seeks writ of mandamus from court to compel ∆ to give commission.
ISSUE
1. Does π have a right to the commission?
2. Does US law allow him to remedy the injury?
3. Is the remedy a mandamus from the court?
HOLDING
Yes, Yes, no.
ANALYSIS
1. President signed commission and seal was affixed. That makes it official. Therefore, depriving π of the commission violates a right.
2. When legislature imposes certain duties on ∆, court can compel ∆ to fulfill those duties when the affect citizens. Therefore, person injured by ∆ can recover by law.
3. Court should stay out of affairs of officers appointed by president. It is what the officer did in the case that makes it proper or improper to issue mandamus. Judicial Act of 1789 says its ok to is-sue mandamus to officer’s of government. Under Constitution, court must either have appellate or original jurisdiction. No appellate because no previous decision. And apparently under original jurisdiction, issue of mandamus isn’t warranted by consitution. In this situation, Judicial Act allows court to choose between a rule in the constitution and another rule it deems superior. But allowing court to disregard consitution is inconsistent. Court wishes to discharge Judiciary Act of 1789 because it is inconsistent with Constitution. Judicial Review: court can review legislature’s decision and invalidate unconstitutional laws.