John Marshall, Chief Justice

Nominated to Supreme Court by John Adams in1801

Marshall agreed, and upheldHamilton’s doctrine of “implied powers”

By doing so, Marshall enlarged federal power to an extraordinary degree

Marshall’s Major GoalsA. Increase the powers of the national govt at the expense of the state legislatures

B. Diminish the powers of the states & encourage the Federalist principle of centralization of gov’t

C. Strengthen the Court at the expense ofCongress/Presidency

D. Property rights of individuals need to be protected from government interference

E. Advance the interests of the propertiedclass/commerce class – (Protect free enterprise from state control – promote industrialization and economic growth)

Research the following Marshall Court Cases….

• Marbury v. Madison– 1803

• Fletcher v. Peck – 1810

• McCulloch v. Maryland– 1819

• Dartmouth College v. Woodward - 1819• Gibbons v. Ogden

– 1824

• FOR EACH– What was the

case?– What was the

decision of the court?

– What was the Court’s reasoning?

– What was the long-range significance of the case?

Marbury v. Madison(1803)

• Background– “Midnight Judge” Marbury

asked Supreme Court to order Madison to deliver his commission as a federal judge (according to the Judiciary Act of 1789)

• Constitutional Issue– The Judiciary Act of 1789

added the power of the writ of mandamus to the original powers in the Constitution

Marbury v. Madison

• Decision– Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional

because it added instances of original jurisdiction for the Supreme Court that were not in the Constitution

• Importance– Supreme Court established the precedent of

JUDICIAL REVIEW – the power of the court to declare a law unconstitutional

Fletcher v. Peck(1810)

• Background:

Georgia legislature was involved in a fraudulent land deal. A new legislature revoked the sale of the land. Mr. Peck bought land from original company and sold it to Mr. Fletcher. Mr. Fletcher wanted his contract with Mr. Peck to be declared null & void and his money returned because Mr. Peck did not have clear title to the land when it was sold.

(Fletcher v. Peck)

• Issue:– Can a contract be

invalidated by a new law passed by the legislature?

• Decision– Original land grant

was valid even though the legislature was corrupt. Cannot cancel the sale ex post facto

Importance:States cannot pass a law impairing the terms of a contractSupreme Court declared a state law unconstitutional

Dartmouth College v. Woodward(1819)

• Background– In Colonial days, Dartmouth

was chartered as a private college run by a board of trustees

– In 1816, the State of New Hampshire passed a law converting it to a state-run college without the consent of the college board of trustees

• Constitutional Issue– Did the N.H. law violate the

Constitutional provisions protecting private property and the sanctity of contracts?

Dartmouth College v. Woodward

• Decision– Actions of N.H. legislature were unconstitutional. The

charter was considered to be a contract and could not be broken by the state

• Importance– Supreme Court reversed the decision of the state

court.– It guaranteed the protection of contracts from

government actions, and defined a corporation as an “artificial being”.

McCulloch v. Maryland(1819)

• Background– Maryland imposed a tax on

the Bank of the US branch office in Maryland in an attempt to force the BUS out of business in Maryland

• Constitutional Issue– Was the BUS properly

created through the use of the elastic clause?

– Can the state tax a federal agency like the BUS?

McCulloch v. Maryland

• Decision– Upheld the Constitutionality of the BUS– Ruled the states cannot tax the federal

government because “the power to tax is the power to destroy”

• Importance– ↑ power of the national gov’t through

use of elastic clause– Limited power of states

Gibbons v. Ogden(1824)

• Background– 2 men operating competing steamboats in the waters between NY & NJ– Ogden – exclusive license by NY– Gibbons – license from federal gov’t

• Constitutional Issue– Could NY authorize exclusive rights to the waters between NY & NJ?

Gibbons v. Ogden

• Decision– Operation of steamboats was interstate

commerce; Congress, not states, regulates interstate commerce

• Importance– Defined interstate commerce to include

transportation (eventually railroads, airlines, trucking companies)

– Expanded role of federal gov’t

Worcester v. Georgia(1832)

• Background– 2 missionaries refused to

obey the Georgia law requiring all whites living in Cherokee territory to obtain a license. Missionaries were sentenced to 4 years hard labor for violating the state law

• Constitutional Issue– Can the state pass laws

concerning the Indian Nations or are the Indian Nations sovereign?

Worcester v. Georgia

• Decision– The state has no power to pass any laws

affecting the Cherokees because it was federal jurisdiction

• Importance– Established tribal autonomy within their

boundaries– Pres. Jackson disagreed, refused to enforce;

Cherokees won case but lost land (“Trail of Tears”)