Abstract
The paper presents a scenario that relates to electronic record-keeping or surveillance and provides a reasonable analytical background to understanding the Due Process Clause, the Fourth Amendment, and other relevant statutes, especially within the framework of the "Marbury v. Madison case".

From the Paper
"The scenario being presented relates to electronic record-keeping or surveillance and provides a reasonable analytical background to understanding the Due Process Clause, the Fourth Amendment, and other relevant statutes, especially within the framework of the "Marbury versus Madison" case. However, the paper will outline why issues related to wire-tapping and surveillance via the Patriot Act as being enforced at the local or state level can be challenged as unconstitutional but how the principles of "Marbury versus Madison" and the Due Process clause would apply to the wiretapping validity. The content of the paper..."

Tags:marbury, madison, congress

Abstract
In this article, the writer notes that no doubt exists regarding the significance given to the complete and thorough understanding of the judicial review process. The writer points out that this process has been treated by many originalists as one of the most decisive, if not the key factor in the Marbury vs. Madison case. The writer maintains that over the years, reviews, analyses and answers given by the various jurists and researchers have varied considerably. With such contrasting views about the Marbury vs. Madison case, the writer states that it is important that one thoroughly studies judicial review in the light of the events, which unfolded before and after the Marbury vs. Madison case. The paper attempts to analyze the chain of events, which lead to the Marbury vs. Madison case and the impact of this case on the issue of judicial review.

Outline:
Introduction
The Review of Marbury v. Madison
Discussion and Conclusion
References

From the Paper
"Clinton reveals that this newborn concept of democracy had been on shaky grounds because of the 1800 elections since there had been clear uncertainty of the transfer of power between the opposing parties. In addition, there existed evident mistrust between the two parties and the federalists strenuously believed that the future of the Untied States would be jeopardized under the Republican rule; and therefore, they had been attempting to avoid such a situation by opposing and causing problems for any Republican take over."
"One of the loopholes, Clinton writes, along with the complete un-identification of political parties, had been that the new government could not appoint a fresh Congress till almost half a year after it took Office because of the haphazard way in which the constitution's timetable had been set. Hence, the Congress had been in control of the Federalists till the 3rd on March 1801, even though they had not been the ruling party."

Tags:lawsuit, Republicans, courts, party

Abstract
This paper explains that John Marshall's core philosophy was that individual rights were paramount and that the best agency to protect those rights is a strong central government. The author relates that "Marbury vs. Madison" defined the role of the Supreme Court; "Fletcher vs. Peck" answered the question of whether or not contracts made by a state are binding. The author continues that "Dartmouth College vs. Woodward" solved the question of what is the nature and identity of a corporation; "McCulloch vs. Maryland " delineates how far the federal government can go in its relationship with the sovereign states to uphold provisions of the federal constitution.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Marbury vs. Madison
Fletcher vs. Peck
Dartmouth vs. Woodward
McCulloch vs. Maryland
Conclusion

From the Paper
"John Adams was defeated in his run for the presidency by Thomas Jefferson in 1800. In the waning days of his administration, Adams appointed sixteen justices of the peace for Washington, DC. These appointments were confirmed the same day by the lame duck federalist congress. The commissions were signed by Adams and delivered to the secretary of state (interestingly Marshall held this office) to be sealed and delivered. But not all of the commissions were delivered because of the pressures of time and a shortage of clerks. When Jefferson assumed office, he and his Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver the remaining commissions. One of the appointees, William Marbury, appealed to the Supreme Court to force Madison to deliver the undelivered commissions. The whole affair caused great political controversy. Jefferson and his followers resented the last minute appointments and saw them as a ploy by the outgoing Federalists to retain some influence and power. Marshall, a Federalist, privately stated that he believed that Marbury was entitled to his commission. Jefferson and Madison made it known that if the court ruled against them and issued a writ ordering Madison to deliver the commission, that they would ignore it. This concerned Marshall because he felt that this defiance would undermine the court. He had to find a way to resolve the situation by making his views about the case known without provoking defiance from Jefferson. In its opinion, written by Marshall, the court addressed three questions: 1.) was Marbury entitled to the commission? 2.) was he entitled to remedy? 3.) if so, was the Supreme Court the place to seek that remedy? The government argued that Marbury had no right to remedy. Marshall addressed the question of the legitimacy of the appointment first. He viewed the appointment to office as akin to individual property rights, which he defended throughout his career. Notwithstanding the fact that the appointments were made by an outgoing president and congress, Marshall affirmed that once a commission was signed and sealed, the appointee had a right to the office. Next, Marshall addressed Marbury's right to remedy. He stated that the purpose of the court was not to decide political questions. Elected officials are accountable to the electorate for political decisions. The judiciary's function is to address legal questions. In this case, the question was a legal one, since it involved an individual's rights, which an elected official could not abrogate. Thus Marshall ruled that Marbury was entitled to remedy. The answer to the third question was the most important. Marshall noted that the Constitution spelled out the Supreme Court's jurisdiction. This particular case was based on an expansion of that jurisdiction by Judiciary Act of 1789. Marshall stated that this law was unconstitutional. Congress could not alter the intent of the constitution by passing a law. In making this ruling, Marshall established the principle of judicial review. He claimed for the court, the power to review the laws of Congress and rule on their constitutionality."

Tags:state, individual, rights, central, corporation

Abstract
The paper examine the origins and evolution of judicial review through an analysis of controlling legislation and a discussion of what happens when a law is struck down as unconstitutional. The paper assesses what alternatives are available to the executive and legislative branches once the judicial branch has exercised judicial review. The paper shows how the concept of judicial review, even though it is not specifically explicated in the Constitution, remains a fundamental component of the American legislative process.

Outline:
Introduction
Review and Discussion
Conclusion

From the Paper
"This is the process by which laws are enacted in the U.S. Although the legislative and executive branches of the federal government enjoy the constitutional right to propose and enact legislation for a wide variety of purposes, such legislation must "pass constitutional muster" in order for it to be effective and the Supreme Court has assumed this responsibility. In this regard, Treaner (2005) reports that, "The Supreme Court has claimed originalist sanction for the view that it is 'the ultimate expositor of the constitutional text,' and in the past decade has struck down a string of congressional statutes on originalist grounds" (455)."

Tags:Constitution, legislation, national, flag

Abstract
The paper discusses the principle of judicial review as espoused by Chief Justice John Marshall in the case of "Marbury v. Madison" and the effect of this decision which affirmed the right of the Supreme Court to decide on the constitutionality of laws and executive branch actions.

From the Paper
"In a series of significant cases, Chief Justice John Marshall of the U.S. Supreme Court established the principle of judicial review in which the authority of the Supreme Court with respect to determining the constitutionality of legislation and executive branch acts was affirmed based upon a reading of the intent of the Framers of the Constitution. Marshall's decisions shaped the way in which the Court would contribute to defining the relative powers of the federal government..."

Tags:Chief Justice John Marshall, US Supreme Court, Marbury v. Madison, judicial review

Abstract
This paper examines former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Marshall. The paper discusses Marshall's many career accomplishments, including army officer, lawyer, delegate, foreign minister, congressman and Secretary of State. The paper also details Marshall's appointment to the Supreme Court bench by President John Adams and his many watershed rulings, such as "Marbury vs. Madison", "McCulloch vs. Maryland" and "Dartmouth College vs. Woodward". The paper then investigates Marshall's contributions to federalism and the opposition he encountered from U.S. Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. The paper concludes that Marshall was truly one of the nation's founding fathers, with wide-reaching, long-lasting influence on American political life.

From the Paper
"Born the son of Thomas Marshall, a successful planter in the newly formed frontier county of Fauquier, John Marshall received a limited education. His formal education consisted of a year spent at the school of Reverend Archibold Campbell and as a student under a Scottish tutor. He read the works of Horace and Livy, as well as the traditional classics. During the outbreak of the war for independence, Marshall served many different posts. In this time period of his life, he gained the gentlemanly qualities necessary for a career politician. Near the end of the war, Marshall continued his education at William and Mary where he studied law briefly. He was granted a law license in 1780. From this point on, Marshall embarked on a storied political career. His ambition and loyalty eventually carried him to the top of the judicial branch of government."

Tags:john, adams, marbury, v., madison, thomas, jefferson, federalism, federalist, founding, father

Abstract
This paper examines two central speeches in Shakespeare's "Henry V" that reveal how motives and style can impart meaning. The paper portrays Henry V as a sovereign king with a public, political character but not a private character and focuses on Shakespeare's stagecraft.

From the Paper
"Henry V's famous "Once more into the breach dear friends" is so clearly a set piece. Henry commands control of the play as a heroic sovereign, a unifying national leader who stirs his soldiers to noble efforts at Harfleur and again at Agincourt. The most telling speech before the English victory over the French one should note is not the rousing St Crispin battle-cry but the "O God of battles, steel my..."

Tags:Style, Theme, Henry V, Stagecraft, Shakespeare., History., Drama., Poetry

Abstract
This paper is a biography of Charles V, Emperor of Europe, one of the most important rulers in European history. The paper describes Charles V's historical significance and how he affected the Renaissance and the Reformation. The paper also includes references to his family and blood line.

From the Paper
"Emperor Charles V was one of the most important ruling personalities in European history. The lottery of birth placed Charles at the center of a genealogical network that covered half of Europe. His father Philip was Duke of Burgundy. His grandfather was Emperor Maximilian of Austria. His mother Joanna was daughter of Isabella and Ferdinand, Spain's Catholic monarchs."

Tags:Charles V, emperor, pope, Holy Roman emperor, catholic, reformation, Martin Luther, Muslin, Turkish invasion, sack of Rome, German princes, Protestants, renaissance.

Abstract
In this article, the writer examines the Canadian case of R v N in terms of police interrogation. The writer concludes that overzealous use of police interrogation should be controlled.

From the Paper
"According to James W. Williams, in recent years the Canadian criminal justice system has been plagued with a number of high profile wrongful convictions. Particular attention has been directed towards the police and their ability to meet their responsibility to investigate crime effectively while protecting the interests, the rights and freedoms of the accused. As Williams has stated, one notable aspect of police operations that has come under increasing scrutiny in this regard is the police interrogation, a practice ... "

Tags:R v N, Canadian law, police, interrogation.

Abstract
This paper takes a look at how the unrestrained power of judicial review not only fits into a democratic society, but also helps protect democracy and liberty in America. The paper explains exactly what judicial review means, how it works today, and why it is a necessity in a country that wants to preserve the ideals of liberty and personal freedom.

From the Paper
"The basic premise of democracy is the idea of one man, one vote. However, in large societies, the idea of one man, one vote, necessarily becomes diluted because it is impracticable. In fact, one would not expect a country the size of the United States to be a true democracy, but a representative government. Furthermore, the idea of a republican government strains the concept of democracy further; to balance state's rights and the rights of all of the nation's citizens, the framers of the Constitution came up with the concept of an Executive branch that represents the will of the nation and a Legislative branch that represents the will of the states. However, that does not explain the third branch of the Federal government. The Judicial Branch, with its almost unfettered power to overturn legislation by both the Executive and Legislative Branches. How does a judiciary with almost unrestrained power fit into a democratic society? It does not, and yet judicial review may be almost single-handedly responsible for the preservation of democracy, and more importantly, liberty in America."

Tags:arbiter, law, overturn, congress, executive, branch, justice, marshall, marbury, v., madison