2. Table of Contents
Marbury v. Madison
• Overview 3
• Arguments 4
• Verdict 5
Miranda v. Phoenix
• Overview 6
• Arguments 7
• Verdict 8
United States v. Nixon
• Overview 9
• Arguments 10
• Verdict 11
3. Marbury v. Madison 1803- Overview
Ending of a
term
• John Adams (a democrat) term was coming to an end.
• He planned for a last minute arrangement to appoint 58 more democrats and give
them government jobs.
• Secretary of state, John Madison was in charge of delivering their commissions
The new
president
• Thomas Jefferson (a republican)won election in 1800
• Jefferson ordered Madison to stop proceeding with Adams’s plan
• 41 of the 58 were appointed
Aftermath
• One of those 17 people who didn’t receive their commission was William Marbury
• Marbury was suppose to be appointed as justice of the peace of the District of
Columbia
• He sued Madison and asked the court to issue a writ of mandamus
4. Arguments
Marbury
• Marbury argued
that it was not fair
that the secretary of
state did not
approve of his new
role as the justice of
peace. Marbury
declared this as
unconstitutional
Madison
•Madison argued
that he was not
guilty to the charges
and that his decision
of not approving the
new role for
Marbury as the
justice of peace was
constitutional and
not based on his
own bias opinion
5. The Verdict
To avoid direct political confrontation,
Marshall dismissed the case on the
grounds of unconstitutionality
6. Miranda v. Arizona- Overview
Ernesto
Miranda
• Ernesto Miranda, a man living in Phoenix, was
interrogated by policemen on the account of rape
and kidnapping
The
Interrogation
• The policemen did not inform him the rights of the
accused
• Miranda admitted to the crime
7. Arguments
Phoenix
• Policemen confessed to
not explaining Miranda
his rights
• They argued that
Miranda had been
convicted before, so
although they didn’t tell
him his rights, he
already knew them
Miranda
• He argued that his
rights of being accused
and rights to an
attorney was not
explained to him before
the incrimination
• Argued that his
confession should be
excluded from trial
because of his rights
not explained to him
8. The Verdict
The supreme court denied Miranda’s appeal of
the case, he was then sentenced to 20-30 years
in imprisonment for each crime committed
9. United States v. Nixon- Overview
Watergate
• President Nixon and aides were accused of
spying on the democrats in at the Watergate
Hotel and office complex
Hearing
• During the hearing it had been discovered
that Nixon had tapes recorded in the oval
office
Prosecutor
• The prosecutor demanded Nixon to turn in
those tapes
10. Arguments
United States
• Argued that Nixon
should give away
confidentiality to the
demands of the legal
system in a criminal
case
• Argued that although
he was entitled to
privacy, this right is
not absolute.
Nixon
• Argued that the case
couldn’t be heard in
court because it
involved the
executive branch.
• Agued that the
president was
entitled to privacy
with his aides-executive
immunity
11. The Verdict
the Supreme Court decided that Nixon must hand over the tapes.
The Court said that under the Constitution, the judiciary had the final voice,
not the Executive branch.
The Court were ware that the President had a right to privileged
communication where certain areas of national security were concerned.
However, the Court stated that this case did not meet those conditions. The
Court declared that no president is above the law.
Nixon handed over the tapes that revealed that he had personally engaged in
the cover-up of the burglary.
