what amendment of the constitution had to do with the marbury vs. madison case?

Answer 1

14th Amendment
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens
of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.
The Fourteenth Amendment (1868)

U.S. Const. art. III, § 2 Clause 2
"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned [within the judicial power of the United States], the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

Marbury’s Legacy
The power of judicial review established by Marbury has enabled the
Court to effect revolutionary change in our understanding of constitutional
provisions. This power has, not unexpectedly, drawn both
criticism and praise over the Court’s history. But it has never been a
power completely beyond the control of the other branches of government.
From the President’s power to nominate and the Senate’s power
to confirm Supreme Court justices to the occasional “great exertions”
of constitutional amendment, the Court remains firmly embedded
within our Constitution’s system of checks and balances.

Answer 2

Marbury vs. Madison centered on Art. III, § 2 Clause 2 of the Constitution--"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned [within the judicial power of the United States], the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

The issue was whether Congress could expand the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as it attempted to do in Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789--"The Supreme Court shall also have appellate jurisdiction from the circuit courts and courts of the several states, in the cases herein after provided for; and shall have power to issue writs of prohibition to the district courts . . . and writs of mandamus . . to any courts appointed, or persons holding office, under the authority of the United States."

The Court struck down this section, setting the over 200-year precedent of judicial review.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_vs._Madison for the background of the case.

Answer 3

the two have been desperate with the help of the final courtroom.... different than that, that is beneficial to attempt examining the two situations. they're appealing insights into the constitutional technique. For Marbury, pay particular interest to the reality that there are 3 important constitutional subjects handle -- affirming rules unconstitutional (what that is often noted for) is barely certainly one of them.