The Early U. S. Supreme Court and theMarshall Court Era

Origins of the Judiciary Branch

What section of the U. S. Constitution established the judicial branch

of our government?

Article III

 

Article III, U. S. Constitution

What are the specific duties, powers and organization of the

Supreme Court as stated in Article III of the U.S.

Constitution? 

There are NONE stated

Article III, U. S. Constitution

"[t]he judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in

such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time

ordain and establish."

Judiciary Act of 1789• Created 13 Judicial Districts for 11 States• Eastern, Middle & Southern Circuits • Created U. S. Attorney General • President Nominates Justices & Senate Approves• Established the Supreme Court’s Jurisdictions• One Chief Justice & 5 Associate Justices• All Justices “Ride the Circuit”• the Court could issue “writs of mandamus”

 

The First U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice:

John Jay, from New York

Associate Justices:John Rutledge, from South Carolina

William Cushing, from MassachusettsJames Wilson, from Pennsylvania

John Blair, from VirginiaJames Iredell, from North Carolina

 

Supreme Court Locations• The Supreme Court was first called to assemble on

Feb. 1, 1790, in the Merchants Exchange Building in New York City, the nation’s first capital

City Hall, Philadelphia

• 1790—1801: Court meets in the old City Hall, Philadelphia

• 1801: Court meets in basement of the capitol in Washington, D.C. (except for 1812—1819 due to War of 1812). and from 1860 until 1935 it met in the old Senate Chamber

The early Court was not at all prestigious. Jay resigned in 1795 to run for Governor of New York.

Who was our second Chief Justice from July to December of 1795 who never actually sat on the Supreme Court?

Washington appointed John Rutledge as an Associate Justice in 1789. He resigned in 1791 to serve on the South Carolina Supreme Court; he never sat on the U.S. Supreme Court. In July 1795, he was appointed Chief Justice.

On July 16, 1795, Rutledge gave a highly controversial speech denouncing the Jay Treaty with England. He reportedly said in the speech "that he had rather the President should die than sign

that puerile instrument" – and that he "preferred war to an adoption of it.” Independent Chronicle (Boston). 1795-08-13, reprinted in The Documentary History of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-1800 by Maeva Marcus and James Russell Perry.

…Rutledge’s attack of Washington and the Jay Treaty and rumors of mental illness resulted in the Senate

letting his appointment expire on 12/28/95 and he attempted suicide that day.

Oliver Ellsworth served as our third Chief justice from 1796 to 1800. As a Senator, he had co-authored the Judiciary Act of 1789

Election of 1796Pres. John Adams Federalist PartyMost electoral votes

Vice Pres. Thomas Jefferson

Democratic Republican Party #2 electoral votes

The Election of 1800Candidate

PartyElectoral

Vote

Thomas Jefferson (VA)Democratic-Republican 73

Aaron Burr (NY)Democratic-Republican 73

John Adams (MA) Federalist 65C.C. Pinckney (SC)

John Jay (NY)

Federalist

Federalist

64

1

Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican replaces Adams, a Federalist

How can Federalists retain their

national power?

Adams’ Efforts to Preserve Federalists’ Power

• Appoints Marshall

Chief Justice• Appoints 42

“Midnight Judges” at 9 pm on final day in office

In 1801, Adams appointed his Secretary of State, John Marshall, as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Like Adams, Marshall was a Federalist who favored a strong central government.

The Federalist Senate stayed in session until midnight to confirm Adams’ 42 new judges, but only 25 were actually delivered that night. The next day, Thomas Jefferson became President. His Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver the final 17 appointments.

William Marbury, one of the midnight judges, asked the Court for a writ of mandamusto order Madison to deliver his appointment and those of the other 16 “midnight judges.” This became the case of Marbury v. Madison.

William Marbury

James Madison

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

The Court’s Decision• Marbury’s appointment was legal.• The Court’s power to grant a writ of

mandamus under the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional.

• Marbury v. Madison was the first time the Supreme Court declared a law of Congress to be unconsitutional.

Origins of Judicial Review• England: Chief Justice Edward Coke's 1610 opinion

in Dr. Bonham’s Case• Glorious Revolution of 1688 ends judicial review in

England and Parliament declared itself supreme• The concept was included in several state

constitutions• “…no scholar to date has identified even one

participant in the ratification fight who argued that the Constitution did not authorize judicial review of Federal statutes.” Prakash and Yoo (2003) in The Origins of Judicial Review

What Do You Think ?

#1 “The Constitution — its words and their meaning — was established by the people, can only be changed by the people, and is sacredly obligatory upon all of government, including judges.”

What Do You Think ?

#2 “(The Constitution is) intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of

human affairs.”

What Do You Think ?

#3 "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what

the judges say it is."

What Do You Think ?

# 4 “Those who made and endorsed our Constitution knew man's nature, and it is to their

ideas, rather than to the temptations of utopia, that we

must ask that our judges adhere.”

Continuing Themes Through History

Federalist v Anti-Federalist

Federalist Party v Democratic Republicans

Adams, Marshall, Chase v Jefferson, Burr

Strong National Government v States Rights

Strong Judiciary v Limited Judiciary

Continuing Theme Through History

President Thomas Jefferson said that judicial review made the Constitution "a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they (Supreme Court) may twist and shape into any form they please."

Who was the only Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court to be impeached?

• Became a staunch Federalist. • Appointed Associate Justice in 1796• Tried Jefferson supporters for violations of Alien & Sedition Acts• “Ought the seditious…attack [by Chase] on the principles of our Constitution . . .to go unpunished?“ --Jefferson letter to Congressman• Impeached by House• Dem-Rep majority Senate (25—9) fails to convict Chase• Serves until death in 1811

Associate Justice Samuel Chase

Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819)

• In 1768, George III chartered Dartmouth College

• In 1815, the NH legislature tried to alter the charter & reinstate the deposed president, converting it from private to public

• Daniel Webster argued for the College• The Court’s decision invalidated the state’s

action and limited the power of the States to interfere with private charters and contracts

Mc Culloch v. Maryland (1819)Congress incorporated the Bank of the U.S. and had a branch in Baltimore, MD. MD required all banks not chartered by MD to pay a tax on the issuance of bank notes.

Mc Culloch v. Maryland (1819)

• Does Congress have the constitutional power to charter a national bank?

• Did Maryland have the constitutional power to tax a national bank chartered by Congress?

YES!

NO!

Mc Culloch v. Maryland (1819)

“(The Constitution is)

intended to endure for

ages to come, and

consequently, to be

adapted to the various

crises of human affairs.”

--John Marshall in Mc Culloch v. Maryland (1819)

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

New York State gave Ogden a

monopoly to operate steam-

boats between New York and

neighboring states. Gibbons

had a federal license to

operate between New York and New Jersey. Ogden went to a New York court seeking to shut down Gibbons.

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

“the Congress shall have the

power …to regulate Commerce

with foreign nations, and among

the several states, and with the

Indian tribes.”

Chief Justice John Marshall

--Commerce Clause, Article I, Section 8,

U.S. Constitution

Gibbons v. Ogden: Decision

Gibbons wins. “Commerce”

includes navigation and

although Gibbons carried

passengers, not goods, it still

involved “commerce.” The federal government could regulate any good unless it was entirely made, sold and used in a single state. States cannot share the power to regulate interstate commerce.

Worcester v. Georgia (1832)• Worcester and other missionaries violated a

GA law that required any person living in Indian territory to have a state license. If they had applied for a license it would have been denied, for they were helping the Indians to resist removal. They were convicted and sentenced to four years of hard labor. They appealed their conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court on the grounds that the law was unconstitutional.

Worcester v. Georgia (1832)• The Decision:

• The relationship between the U.S. and Indian nations is that of nations

• U.S. inherited the sole right of dealing with Indians from the British

• Only the national government, and not states, have authority involving Indians and Indian territory

Marshall Court Era: ConclusionAlthough Washington (sided

With Federalists) and Adams

were the only Federalist

Presidents, the Federalists’

belief in establishing a strong

central government was extended until 1835 through Adams’ appointment of Chief Justice John Marshall.

John Marshall

Marshall Court Era: ConclusionThe Marshall Court decisions

asserted the power of judicial

review & clearly established the

supremacy of the national

government over the states• Commerce (Gibbons v. Ogden)• Banking (Mc McCullough v. Maryland)• Contracts (Dartmouth College case)• Indian affairs (Worcester v. Georgia)

John Marshall