Marshall Court

Marshall Court

1802-1824

START

INDEX

Marbury v. Madison

McCulloch v. Maryland

Gibbons v. Ogden

Worcester v. Georgia

conclusion

Marbury v. Madison

Issues

Marbury v. Madison

Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams in the 1800 presidential election. Before Jefferson took office, Adams had appointed dozens of new judicial positions to Federalist judges. (Midnight Judges) The appointees were approved by the Senate, but they would not be valid until their commissions were delivered by the Secretary of State. William Marbury had been appointed Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia, but his commission was not delivered. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to compel the new Secretary of State, James Madison, to deliver the documents.

Does the Supreme Court have the power to review and strike down laws passed by Congress?

Marbury v. Madison

The issues at hand...

Did Marbury have a legal right to receive his commission as a justice of the peace?

Does the Supreme Court have the authority to compel Secretary of State James Madison to deliver the commission?

The Court found that Madison’s refusal to deliver the commission was illegal, but did not order Madison to hand over Marbury’s commission. Instead, the Court held that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 enabling Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional.

John Marshall helped to establish the principle of judicial review - i.e the power to declare a law unconstitutional

+ Index

McCulloch v. Maryland

McCulloch v. Maryland

Issue

Maryland wanted to tax the federal government because the state's leaders opposed the establishment of the Second Bank of the United States. They saw it as an overreach of federal power that threatened state sovereignty and local banks. By imposing a tax on the federal bank’s branch operating in Maryland, the state sought to limit its influence, protect local banking interests, and assert its authority over business conducted within its borders.

McCulloch v. Maryland

The issues at hand...

1) Does Congress have the authority to establish a national bank?

2) Does a state (Maryland) have the power to tax a federal institution?

Ruling

1) Congress has the implied power to create the bank under the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution.2) Declared that states could not tax federal institutions, asserting the principle of federal supremacy over state laws.

Gibbons v. Ogden

Issues

Gibbons v. Ogden

Thomas Gibbons was given a federal license to operate steamboats between New York and New Jersey. However, the state of New York granted Aaron Ogden a monopoly to operate his steamboats in New York waters. In other words, two different steam boat companies were given access to the same waters. Gibbons challenged Ogden’s monopoly, arguing that his federal license allowed him to operate freely between states, regardless of New York’s laws.

Gibbons v. Ogden

The issues at hand...

1) Does the state of New York have the authority to grant a monopoly to Aaron Ogden for operating steamboats within its water, even though Thomas Gibbons had a federal license to operate steamboats between New York and New Jersey?

2) Is the regulation of interstate commerce a power reserved to the states or does it fall under the exclusive authority of Congress?

The Supreme Court sided with Gibbons, ruling that the federal government had the authority to regulate interstate commerce, not individual states. This decision reinforced the supremacy of federal law in matters affecting trade and transportation between states.

Ruling

Worcester v. Georgia

Worcester v. Georgia

Issue

Involved the sovereignty of Native American nations and the authority of state laws. Samuel Worcester, a missionary, was living on Cherokee land in Georgia without a state license, which violated a Georgia law requiring non-Native Americans to obtain permission to reside on Native lands. Worcester argued that the state law was unconstitutional because the Cherokee Nation was a sovereign entity, and only the federal government had the authority to regulate interactions with Native American tribes.

Worcester v. Georgia

The issues at hand...

1) Worcester argued that the state law was unconstitutional because only the federal government has the authority to regulate interactions with Native American tribes.

Fuled in favor of Worcester, stating that the Cherokee Nation was a distinct, sovereign community and that Georgia’s law had no authority over it. The decision established that only the federal government could deal with Native American nations, affirming tribal sovereignty.

Ruling

Practice LEQ

Log in to Class Companion and complete the practice LEQ titled Debates Over Fed. Government ***You may use what I've done on the white board for guidance. I've only create TWO POES...you've got to come up with your 3rd POE on your own. (HINT: Check out the green bubbles.) -Once done, take this opportunity to complete any notes or vocabulary