Final answer:
From Marbury vs. Madison, we gained the establishment of judicial review, affirming the U.S. Supreme Court's power to declare legislative acts unconstitutional and maintaining a balance of power among government branches.
Step-by-step explanation:
The landmark case of Marbury vs. Madison in 1803 is renowned for establishing the principle of judicial review in the United States. This principle grants the Supreme Court the authority to determine the constitutionality of legislative acts. John Marshall's opinion in the case cleverly balanced a resolution that, on one hand, upheld the rights of William Marbury but, on the other hand, did not directly confront President Jefferson's administration.
The Court found that Marbury was indeed entitled to his commission and that Madison had acted unlawfully by not delivering it. However, it also ruled that the Supreme Court could not issue a writ of mandamus to enforce this because the Judiciary Act of 1789 that gave the court this power expanded the court's original jurisdiction beyond what Article III of the Constitution allowed. As a result, Marbury did not receive his commission, but the precedent for judicial nationalism was set, which upheld the balance of power between the branches of government and reinforced the Court's role as a central fixture in government policy.
Through this case, the judiciary also firmly positioned itself as the arbiter of constitutional interpretation at the federal level, ensuring that no law or executive action could infringe upon the Constitution. This power is a fundamental aspect of the checks and balances system intrinsic to the U.S. government.