What act represents an unconstitutional expansion of Supreme Court jurisdiction?

What act represents an unconstitutional expansion of Supreme Court jurisdiction?

• A. Judicial Review
• B. Section 13 Judiciary Act
• C. Crimes Act of 1790
• D. Vessel National Character Rule

Answer: (B)

The Judiciary Act of 1789, particularly Section 13, is historically significant because it attempted to extend the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction beyond what is established in the Constitution. Specifically, the Act sought to grant the Supreme Court the authority to issue writs of mandamus to compel officials to act in accordance with the law. This was later deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803), where Chief Justice John Marshall established the principle of judicial review and clarified the limits of the Court's original jurisdiction. Thus, the Judiciary Act's expansion of the Court's powers is recognized as unconstitutional because it overstepped the boundaries defined by the Constitution itself.

The Judiciary Act of 1789, particularly Section 13, is historically significant because it attempted to extend the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction beyond what is established in the Constitution. Specifically, the Act sought to grant the Supreme Court the authority to issue writs of mandamus to compel officials to act in accordance with the law. This was later deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803), where Chief Justice John Marshall established the principle of judicial review and clarified the limits of the Court's original jurisdiction. Thus, the Judiciary Act's expansion of the Court's powers is recognized as unconstitutional because it overstepped the boundaries defined by the Constitution itself.