During the first several years of the Supreme Court's existence, it languished under the guidance of chief justices such as John Jay. Jay was the primary author of the New York state constitution, one of the writers of the Federalist Papers, and a fervent patriot. In 1789, Washington appointed Jay the first chief justice. However, few cases were brought before the Court, the political leaders of the time considered it insignificant, and the Court had very little power in comparison to the legislative and executive branches. Jay resigned as chief justice to become governor of New York in 1795, a position for which he actively campaigned while serving as chief justice.
The Court took a step forward in 1801, when John Marshall became chief justice. Marshall recognized that the Court needed to take its proper place as one of the three equal branches of government and that the Court could act as a major policy shaper for the nation. Marshall's agenda for the Court included expanding the power of the Court, helping the nation expand its fledgling capitalism, and imposing the doctrine of national supremacy over the states. He served as chief justice for 34 years, from 1801 to 1835. Although he had six colleagues on the Supreme Court, Marshall's position as chief justice—along with his personality, legal prowess, and will—resulted in many rulings that reflected his personal interpretation of the Constitution and his belief in a powerful central government. Some of his most famous cases include Marbury v. Madison, Fletcher v. Peck, McCulloch v. Maryland, and Gibbons v. Ogden.
In the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803), Marshall ruled on the legality of the appointment of a set of " judges" by outgoing President John Adams in an attempt to place Federalist judges on the bench before leaving the presidency. Marshall used this case to establish the doctrine of judicial review, which gave the courts power to determine whether acts of the government are constitutional. The doctrine of judicial review was extended in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816), a case that concerned the confiscation of Loyalists' property by the state of Virginia during the American Revolution. Denny Martin, one of the Loyalists whose property was confiscated, sued on the grounds that treaties with the British guaranteed the protection of this property. The Virginia court upheld the confiscation, but the case went to Marshall and the Supreme Court on appeal. Marshall reversed this decision, and by doing so enforced the right of the Supreme Court to reverse decisions of state courts. Marshall's ruling upheld the supremacy clause of the Constitution.
The case of Fletcher v. Peck (1810) concerned a dispute between John Peck and Robert Fletcher over the validity of a contract regarding the sale of a plot of land in Georgia. The Marshall Court declared the sanctity of contracts and secured the basis of capitalism in private enterprise. This ruling clearly asserted the Supreme Court's right to invalidate state laws that conflict with the Constitution. Fletcher v. Peck was affirmed in the case of Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819). In this case, the New Hampshire legislature attempted to change DartmouthCollege from a private institution into a state university. After being stripped of their ability to control resources, old trustees of the college filed suit. They claimed that it was unconstitutional for the New Hampshire legislature to interfere with the college's corporate charter, because it was a form of a contract. The Marshall Court confirmed the Court's power of judicial review and ruled that the Constitution protects contracts against state encroachments. Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution provides that "no State shall...pass any...Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts." As Georgia and New Hampshire attempted to control the property within their borders, Marshall's Court reversed the state decisions, upheld the rights of private corporations and contracts, reaffirmed the power of judicial review, and established the supremacy of the Constitution over the states.
The "bank case" of McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) is often considered John Marshall's single most important interpretation of the Constitution because it dealt with the division of power between the federal government and the states. This landmark case addressed whether or not Congress has the power to create a national bank. The state of Maryland charged the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the United States, a bank created by Congress, a hefty tax. The Baltimore branch refused to pay, and Maryland brought suit against the chief bank employee, called the "head cashier," John W. McCulloch. Marshall used the implied powers of Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, the necessary and proper clause, to enable Congress to enact legislation within the spirit of the Constitution. This case gave the federal government supremacy over the states regarding intrastate business. According to Marshall, "the power to tax is the power to destroy." By upholding the constitutionality of the Bank of the U.S. and the constitutional right of Congress to use the implied powers of the elastic clause, Marshall set the standard for federal supremacy.
A related case, Cohens v. Virginia (1821), concerned an act of Congress that authorized the operation of a lottery in the District of Columbia. The Cohen brothers violated state law by purchasing D.C. lottery tickets and selling them in the state of Virginia. Virginia authorities tried and convicted the Cohens, and then declared themselves the final authority in the dispute between the states and the national government. In this case, Marshall held that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to review state criminal proceedings and declared that by ratifying the Constitution, the states gave up some sovereignty and must accept the jurisdiction of the federal government. Cohens v. Virginia reaffirmed the Supreme Court's right to review all state court judgments in cases involving the Constitution or powers of the federal government.
In Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), also called the "Steamboat Case," Aaron Ogden purchased exclusive rights to operate a ferry between New York and New Jersey. When Thomas Gibbons, who held a federal trade license, set up a competing line, Ogden sued him. In this case, Marshall invalidated state monopolies and declared that only Congress can control interstate commerce. This ruling ended the battle between the states over commerce and allowed the uniform growth of business regulated by the national government. Marshall's decisions acknowledged the idea of judicial limitation on legislative powers and made the Supreme Court a vital part of America's system of government. Marshall served as chief justice until his death in 1835, at which time Andrew Jackson appointed Roger Taney. Although he maintained most of Marshall's positions, he was a "states' rights" judge who was less in favor of the doctrine of national supremacy than was Marshall. Taney served as chief justice from 1836 to 1864.
Taney is most well known for his controversial decision in the case of Scott v. Sandford (1857). Taney found that Dred Scott, a slave who claimed to be free, was legally still a slave. This decision repealed the Kansas-Nebraska Act as well as the Missouri Compromise. The Dred Scott case threw the nation into a tailspin that resulted in the Civil War. Following the war, the Scott v. Sandford decision led to the Thirteenth Amendment, which gave freedom to former slaves, and to the Fourteenth Amendment, which guaranteed citizenship with equal protection and due process for all citizens.
No comments:
Post a Comment