Jonh_Marshall

JOHN MARSHALL John Marshall was born the eldest of fifteen children on September 24, 1755 in Germantown, Virginia. Like many of the other American revolutionaries, his life was one well spent. While he was most famous for his service to the country as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, his other accomplishments are noteworthy as well. Marshall was an army officer, lawyer, delegate, foreign minister, congressman, and Secretary of State. After being appointed to the bench by John Adams, he ruled on several important cases. Among them are “Marbury v. Madison”, “McCulloch v. Maryland”, and “Dartmouth College v. Woodward”. His contributions on these cases alone warrant him as an important figure in American History. His career met a lot of roadblocks from future presidents, including Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson. Despite these setbacks, Marshall established himself as a voice for federalism. His influence on American political life was overwhelmingly positive, as he was truly one of the nations founding fathers. Born the son of Thomas Marshall, a successful planter in the newly formed frontier county of Fauquier, John Marshall received a limited education. His formal education consisted of a year spent at the school of Reverend Archibold Campbell and as a student under a Scottish tutor. He read the works of Horace and Livy, as well as the traditional classics. During the outbreak of the war for independence, Marshall served many different posts. In this time period of his life, he gained the gentlemanly qualities necessary for a career politician. Near the end of the war, Marshall continued his education at William and Mary where he studied law briefly. He was granted a law license in 1780. From this point on, Marshall embarked on a storied political career. His ambition and loyalty eventually carried him to the top of the judicial branch of government. [1] The first federal appointment came from President John Adams. Marshall was to become part of a foreign delegation to France to resolve trade issues. Before the three-man delegation, was allowed to see Foreign Minister Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord, they were approached by three individual agents known as X, Y and Z. These men demanded a bribe to be paid to France. If the delegation refused to pay the “douceur”, France would have no choice but to declare war on the United States.[2] The delegation was infuriated by the French demands. Ambassador Charles C. Pickney stated: “No. No. Not a sixpence.” [3] The delegation returned home and Marshall was considered a hero for standing up to the hawkish French. A Naval War followed the notorious “X-Y-Z Affair”, but ended shortly at the 1800 convention. Marshall’s influence on diplomacy was quite notable. Along with his fellow ambassadors, he reiterated to the French, that the United States was an independent nation that would not pay tribute to anyone. Marshall stood his ground throughout the entire ordeal. The “X-Y-Z Affair” further influenced his opinions on international law. He believed that the peace of the United States had to be anchored in law. Harassment towards the United States was not to be tolerated, especially by nations run by ambitious military regimes. Marshall stated: “A nation would justly be considered as violating its faith … which would suddenly and without previous notice, exercise its territorial powers in a manner not consistent to the urges and received obligations of the civilized world.” [4] Upon several other duties and assignments, Marshall was eventually appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States by President John Adams. His appointment was met with much discouragement from Thomas Jefferson and their home state of Virginia. Adams wished to place a Southern Federalist in the court before his term ran up. He did so and Marshall began his career with many powerful enemies. Just the same, Marshall ruled on some of the nations most important cases. [5] The first major ruling John Marshall acted on was the landmark case of “Marbury v. Madison”. This case had major historical, constitutional, and political implications. When Thomas Jefferson assumed office, the new Secretary of State James Madison, withheld former President Adam’s appointment of William Marbury. Marbury was to be the new Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia. Without hesitation, Marbury called on the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus requesting Madison to deliver his commission. The Court now headed by Marshall, denied the writ because it ruled that it did not have the jurisdiction to do so. This invalidated a past act of Congress that held that the Supreme Court could issue such a writ. In affect, Marshall ruled that Congress passed an unconstitutional law. Even further, this ruling established that the Constitution always takes precedent over any law passed by Congress. [6] Constitutionally, “Marbury v. Madison” was extremely important. It set the precedent for the Supreme Court to apply judicial review to all laws. Politically, the case was one of many in which Marshall and Jefferson battled. Marshall defeated Jefferson by raising the importance of the Supreme Court and giving it sole responsibility on interpreting the Constitution. Jefferson could not answer to Marshall’s ruling because his actions were limited by the Constitution he helped create. [7] While Marshall had effectively limited the powers of Congress with his ruling on “Marbury v. Madison”, the next important case he rule on gave Congress “implied powers” not directly specified by the Constitution. Considered by many to be Marshall’s greatest opinion ever handed down, “McCulloch v. Maryland” increased the breadth of the federal government. The main questions that were considered were whether or not the United States could constitutionally incorporate a bank, and could the United States tax this bank. Marshall ruled that the government could incorporate a bank, but that they could not levy a tax on it. This decision described the United States as a country governed by enumerated powers. These powers while limited, reign supreme over all other laws incorporated or not. Thus individual states do not have the power to tax the federal governments institutions. [8] That same year in 1819, Marshall gave a very important ruling on the issue of property and corporate charters. “Dartmouth College v. Woodward” would go on to give protection to businesses from unjust federal regulation. The case was over a royal charter establishing Dartmouth College to hold a continual board of twelve trustees. The New Hampshire legislature passed a bill that expanded the size of the trustees to include the president of the Senate, the speaker of the House of Representatives, and the governor of New Hampshire. The original board of trustees then brought a suit claiming that the state government had abridged their charter. The state courts all upheld the legislature’s bill, and eventually it reached the Federal Supreme Court. Marshall in turn, ruled in favor of the trustees and reversed the state courts’ decision. His court decided that the charter was an official public document and that the Constitution prohibits states from altering any official public document. [9] The case of “Worcester v. Georgia” in 1832, dealt with the Cherokee Indian nation to be held exempt from state law. Marshall ruled that the Indian nation was a “distinct community, occupying its own territory.” [10] This case limited states’ claims over Indian lands. The decision so infuriated President Andrew Jackson that he said: “Well, John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!” [11] Marshall’s ruling was very sympathetic to the plight of the Cherokee people. This ruling established a moral code that the Supreme Court has followed ever since. Another important case includes “Gibbons v. Ogden” in 1824, where Marshall ruled that states cannot interfere when Congress regulates commerce. Marshall’s opinion was key in the interpretation of the commerce clause. He stated that “a narrow construction [of the commerce clause] would cripple the government and render it unequal to the objects for which it is declared to be instituted, and to which the powers given, as fairly understood, render it competent…”[12] This “narrow interpretation” disrupted many powerful east coast monopolies and helped commerce and industry spread west. Throughout Marshall’s distinguished career, he battled his party’s opposition. His chief opponent and loudest critic was Thomas Jefferson. The two rarely agreed and in the end Marshall usually won. Criticism came from other branches of government, which opposed him because of the heightened power he gave the bench as well as the Federal government. The fight between Jefferson and Marshall reached its peak during the trial of Aaron Burr. Marshall presided over the case in which Burr was accused of treason. He defied Jefferson throughout the case and even subpoenaed some of Jefferson’s documents. In the end, Burr was declared guilty of conspiracy, but not of treason due to the Constitution’s clause requiring proof of an “overt act”. [13] Jefferson and Marshall were bitter enemies throughout both of their careers. As to if Jefferson’s criticisms were valid, they most definitely were. The anti-Federalist position was both valid and relevant. Their view of the newly formed nation simply disagreed with the vision of Marshall. The criticism of President Andrew Jackson on Marshall’s ruling of “Worcester v. Georgia”, was relevant and understandable. Jackson didn’t view the Cherokee’s as citizens of the United States. He saw them as a conquered people, so the rights of the Constitution did not apply to them. This opinion, while now considered outrageous, was a view that held considerable merit. [14] John Marshall was very positive influence on American Political life. He established a precedent of federalism in the cases of “Marbury v. Madison” and “Gibbons v. Ogden”. Marshall defined the role of the Supreme Court. He made the court one that’s most important duty is to interpret the Constitution. His rulings had a major effect that can only be seen as positive due to the broad success of the United States in all areas of government and world affairs. Hopefully his brilliance will be revealed as more and more Americans learn the beauty of the Constitution and recognize as Marshall did, that it is a living document and the sole legal determiner in the United States. WORKS CITED 1. Brisbin, Richard A. “On History, Virtue, and Legality.” John Marshall’s Achievement: Law, Politics, and Constitutional Interpretations. Ed. By Thomas C. Shevory. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press Inc. 1989. 102-103. 2. Clinton, Robert Lowery. “Game Theory, Legal History, and the Origins of Judicial Review: A Revisionist Analysis of Marbury v. Madison”. American Journal of Political Science Vol. 38, No. 2: 285 3. Dodd, William E. “Chief Justice Marshall and Virginia, 1813-1821.” American Historical Review (1907): 776-779. 4. Faulkner, Robert K. “John Marshall and the Burr Trial” The Journal of American History. Vol. 53, No 2: 247-256 5. Hobson, Charles F. The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1996. 1-4 6. Miles, Edwin A. “After John Marshall’s Decision: Worcester v. Georgia and the Nullification Crisis”. The Journal of Southern History. Vol. 39, No. 4: 519 7. Shevory, Thomas C. John Marshall’s Achievement: Law, Politics, and Constitutional Interpretations. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1989. 100 8. Shevory, Thomas C. John Marshall’s Law: Interpretation, Ideology, and Interest. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1994. 104-108 9. Smith, Jean Edward. John Marshall: Definer of a Nation. New York, New York: Henry Holt and Company Inc., 1996. 199-210 10. Thayer, James Bradley. John Marshall. New York: Da Capo Press, 1974. 73-78 ----------------------- [1] Hobson, Charles F. The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1996. 1-4 [2] Smith, Jean Edward. John Marshall: Definer of a Nation. New York, New York: Henry Holt and Company Inc., 1996. 199-210 [3] Ibid. 227 [4] Brisbin, Richard A. “On History, Virtue, and Legality.” John Marshall’s Achievement: Law, Politics, and Constitutional Interpretations. Ed. By Thomas C. Shevory. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press Inc. 1989. 102-103. [5] Dodd, William E. “Chief Justice Marshall and Virginia, 1813-1821.” American Historical Review (1907): 776-779. [6] Thayer, James Bradley. John Marshall. New York: Da Capo Press, 1974. 73-78 [7] Clinton, Robert Lowery. “Game Theory, Legal History, and the Origins of Judicial Review: A Revisionist Analysis of Marbury v. Madison”. American Journal of Political Science Vol. 38, No. 2: 285 [8] Thayer, 87 [9] Shevory, Thomas C. John Marshall’s Law: Interpretation, Ideology, and Interest. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1994. 104-108 [10] Shevory, Thomas C. John Marshall’s Achievement: Law, Politics, and Constitutional Interpretations. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1989. 100 [11] Miles, Edwin A. “After John Marshall’s Decision: Worcester v. Georgia and the Nullification Crisis”. The Journal of Southern History. Vol. 39, No. 4: 519 [12] Shevory, Achievement, 101 [13] Faulkner, Robert K. “John Marshall and the Burr Trial” The Journal of American History. Vol. 53, No 2: 247-256 [14] Miles, 523-530