The Marshall Court The Marshall Court (1801 to 1835) (1801 to 1835)

OBJECTIVE(S):OBJECTIVE(S): • Describe the function of the Describe the function of the

judicial branch judicial branch • Explain how the Marshall Court Explain how the Marshall Court

impacted United States historyimpacted United States history• Identify the historical Identify the historical

circumstances surrounding the circumstances surrounding the landmark cases from this eralandmark cases from this era

I.I. Appointed by President John Appointed by President John Adams (he was his Secretary of Adams (he was his Secretary of State) upon the sweeping victory State) upon the sweeping victory of Jefferson’s Democratic-of Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans, Federalist John Republicans, Federalist John Marshall presided as Chief Justice Marshall presided as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court over a very of the Supreme Court over a very important period of judicial important period of judicial history. history.

There are a handful of key cases that There are a handful of key cases that symbolize how the Marshall Court symbolize how the Marshall Court strengthened the power of the strengthened the power of the federal government at the nation’s federal government at the nation’s inception.inception.

II. Marbury v. Madison (1803—Marbury v. Madison (1803—during Thomas Jefferson's during Thomas Jefferson's Presidency)Presidency)

A.A. Marbury v. Madison is perhaps Marbury v. Madison is perhaps the most important Supreme the most important Supreme Court of all time because it Court of all time because it established the Court’s power of established the Court’s power of judicial review. judicial review.

B.B. The Constitution—which only The Constitution—which only establishes that there will be a establishes that there will be a judicial branch of the federal judicial branch of the federal government—left it to Congress government—left it to Congress to decide how the federal court to decide how the federal court system would actually work.system would actually work.

C.C. So the Federalist controlled So the Federalist controlled Congresses under Washington and Congresses under Washington and Adams passed laws—judiciary actsAdams passed laws—judiciary acts—setting up federal court system.—setting up federal court system.

D.D. When Adams and the Federalists lost When Adams and the Federalists lost the presidency and control of Congress the presidency and control of Congress to Jefferson’s and the Democratic-to Jefferson’s and the Democratic-Republicans in the election of 1800, Republicans in the election of 1800, the lame-duck Federalist Congress the lame-duck Federalist Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, creating new judgeships for Adams to creating new judgeships for Adams to appoint Federalists to so that they appoint Federalists to so that they could maintain control of one of the could maintain control of one of the branches of government.branches of government.

E.E. Jefferson and his Secretary of State, Jefferson and his Secretary of State, future President James Madison, future President James Madison, refused to deliver all of Adams’ last refused to deliver all of Adams’ last minute appointments, leading William minute appointments, leading William Marbury—whom Adams had Marbury—whom Adams had appointed as Justice of the Peace for appointed as Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia—to sue to the District of Columbia—to sue to have the Supreme Court force have the Supreme Court force Madison to give him his appointment.Madison to give him his appointment.

F.F. Instead of siding with Marbury, Instead of siding with Marbury, Marshall’s court found the Judiciary Marshall’s court found the Judiciary Acts to be in violation of the Acts to be in violation of the Constitution. The Court asserted that Constitution. The Court asserted that laws passed by Congress that violated laws passed by Congress that violated the Constitution were null and void. the Constitution were null and void.

G.G. They called this process of checking to They called this process of checking to see if a law was Constitutional or not see if a law was Constitutional or not judicial review and it quickly became judicial review and it quickly became the most import role of the Supreme the most import role of the Supreme Court, even though it is not in the Court, even though it is not in the Constitution itself.Constitution itself.

III. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819—McCulloch v. Maryland (1819—during James Monroe's during James Monroe's Presidency)Presidency)

A.A. The Bank of the United States, as The Bank of the United States, as created by Alexander Hamilton during created by Alexander Hamilton during Washington’s Presidency, had to be re-Washington’s Presidency, had to be re-approved—or re-chartered—approved—or re-chartered—periodically by Congress. While on its periodically by Congress. While on its second charter, the state of Maryland second charter, the state of Maryland passed a law taxing any out-of-state passed a law taxing any out-of-state banks. The only one was the Second banks. The only one was the Second Bank of the United States.Bank of the United States.

B.B. James McCulloch, director of the James McCulloch, director of the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the United States, refused to pay the tax. United States, refused to pay the tax. In the ensuing court case, the In the ensuing court case, the Maryland court—using a strict Maryland court—using a strict interpretation of the Constitution—interpretation of the Constitution—argued that Congress violated the argued that Congress violated the Constitution by creating the bank. Constitution by creating the bank.

With that argument, the case also took on With that argument, the case also took on a new dimension as it argued that the a new dimension as it argued that the States were more powerful than the States were more powerful than the national government. national government.

C.C. The case was appealed The case was appealed to the Supreme Court. to the Supreme Court.

C.C. The case was appealed The case was appealed to the Supreme Court. to the Supreme Court.

The Marshall Court ruled that the federal The Marshall Court ruled that the federal government did have the power to create government did have the power to create the bank, citing the implied powers of the the bank, citing the implied powers of the “necessary and proper” clause of the “necessary and proper” clause of the Constitution. The Court also ruled that Constitution. The Court also ruled that the States could not interfere with an the States could not interfere with an action of the federal government, action of the federal government, asserting the supremacy of the national asserting the supremacy of the national government over the states.government over the states.

IV. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824—during Gibbons v. Ogden (1824—during James Monroe's Presidency)James Monroe's Presidency)

A.A. The New York State Legislature The New York State Legislature granted exclusive rights for the granted exclusive rights for the operation of steamboats in New York operation of steamboats in New York waters to Robert R. Livingston and waters to Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton. They in turn, sold a Robert Fulton. They in turn, sold a license to Aarron Ogden to use his license to Aarron Ogden to use his steamships in New York waters.steamships in New York waters.

B.B. Thomas Gibbons was a competing Thomas Gibbons was a competing steamship operator based out of New steamship operator based out of New Jersey. He ran his ships from New Jersey. He ran his ships from New Jersey to New York City. Ogden filed Jersey to New York City. Ogden filed suit against him to stop him from suit against him to stop him from sailing in New York waters because he sailing in New York waters because he had exclusive rights to do so.had exclusive rights to do so.

C.C. The issue of the cases was whether or The issue of the cases was whether or not a state could make a law limiting not a state could make a law limiting interstate—between states—trade. interstate—between states—trade. Gibbons argued that only the federal Gibbons argued that only the federal government could make laws about government could make laws about interstate trade and that the New York interstate trade and that the New York law grating exclusive rights was law grating exclusive rights was unconstitutional. unconstitutional.

Despite this, the New York court found Despite this, the New York court found in favor of Ogden and issued an in favor of Ogden and issued an injunction preventing Gibbons from injunction preventing Gibbons from legally operating in New York waters.legally operating in New York waters.

D.D. Gibbons attorneys appealed the case Gibbons attorneys appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court. The all the way to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled that the Commerce Clause Court ruled that the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution gives of the United States Constitution gives the federal government sole authority the federal government sole authority to make laws regarding trade between to make laws regarding trade between states and any state law attempting to states and any state law attempting to do the same was unconstitutional and, do the same was unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void.therefore, null and void.

V. Worcester v. Georgia (1832—Worcester v. Georgia (1832—during Andrew Jackson's during Andrew Jackson's Presidency)Presidency)

A.A. In the 1820’s and 1830’s, the state of In the 1820’s and 1830’s, the state of Georgia had begun a campaign to try Georgia had begun a campaign to try to force the Cherokee tribe to resettle to force the Cherokee tribe to resettle west. The Cherokees brought their west. The Cherokees brought their fight for their lands to the courts, fight for their lands to the courts, citing a Georgia law the prohibited citing a Georgia law the prohibited non-Indians from being on Indian land non-Indians from being on Indian land without a state license.without a state license.

1.1. This law was made to prevent white This law was made to prevent white missionaries, such as Samuel missionaries, such as Samuel Worcester and six others, from Worcester and six others, from encouraging Native American encouraging Native American resistance to removal. resistance to removal.

2.2. Worcester and the other missionaries Worcester and the other missionaries refused to apply for the licenses (that refused to apply for the licenses (that would have been denied anyway) and would have been denied anyway) and were tried and convicted.were tried and convicted.

B.B. In that case, Worcester and the In that case, Worcester and the missionaries claimed that they had not missionaries claimed that they had not done anything wrong because the done anything wrong because the Georgia law was being enforced on Georgia law was being enforced on sovereign Native American territory. sovereign Native American territory. They claimed that only the federal They claimed that only the federal government could make such a law, so government could make such a law, so the state law was unconstitutional.the state law was unconstitutional.

C.C. When the case was appealed to the When the case was appealed to the Supreme Court, the Court agreed and Supreme Court, the Court agreed and ordered Worcester freed. Native ordered Worcester freed. Native American tribes were to be treated the American tribes were to be treated the same as foreign nations and only the same as foreign nations and only the federal government had the authority federal government had the authority to deal with them. to deal with them.

D.D. But the case did not make any ruling But the case did not make any ruling to stop Indian removal. Andrew to stop Indian removal. Andrew Jackson had made his name, in part, as Jackson had made his name, in part, as an Indian fighter. When he became an Indian fighter. When he became President, Jackson suggested and President, Jackson suggested and pushed Congress to pass the Indian pushed Congress to pass the Indian Removal Act of 1830. The Act ordered Removal Act of 1830. The Act ordered the removal of all Native Americans the removal of all Native Americans east of the Mississippi River to be east of the Mississippi River to be moved west.moved west.

VI.VI. The Era of the Marshall Court is The Era of the Marshall Court is remembered most for it strengthening remembered most for it strengthening of the new central government of the of the new central government of the United States. In issues over United States. In issues over supremacy, it routinely ruled in favor of supremacy, it routinely ruled in favor of the national government at the the national government at the expense of the states. Marshall who expense of the states. Marshall who served longer than any other Chief served longer than any other Chief Justice in history, also made the Court Justice in history, also made the Court itself more powerful by articulating and itself more powerful by articulating and exercising the power of judicial review.exercising the power of judicial review.