The Marshall Court
(1801-1835)
Judicial Review
Federal Supremacy
Loose Interpretation
Case
Marbury v.
Madison
(1803)
Summary of Facts
Pres. Adams’ last-minute
judicial appointments; Jefferson
orders Sec. of State to block
them
Decision
A portion of the Judicial Act of
1789 was unconstitutional;
Marshall declared Congress had
exceeded its authority
Impact of Decision
Judicial Review (power of federal
courts to review laws) established;
Americans have generally accepted
court’s role in monitoring the other
branches
Fletcher v.
Peck
(1810)
Georgia legislature had
fraudulently made a land grant
(Yazoo Land Co) to private
speculators; the next legislature
(following election) repealed
land grants due to
corruption/bribery
Southern and western banks
want to destroy BUS (seen as
instrument of the elite); MD
tried to tax the BUS (within its
state lines); tried to convince
Court that BUS illegal under
strict construction
State legislature attempted to
turn a private college public
(though established by a royal
charter –King George III); in
reality an attempt by
Republicans to limit Federalist
influence
States can’t interfere in contract
obligations (land grants are
contracts), even if fraudulent
Establishes judicial review of state
laws (must comply with
Constitution); enforcement of
supremacy clause; reinforced
sanctity of contracts; actions taken
under state laws are not illegal
Defended BUS as constitutional
using the elastic clause
Cohens v.
Virginia
(1821)
Virginia State Supreme Court
convicted the Cohens of
illegally selling Washington,
D.C. lottery tickets (which were
authorized by Congress)
Conviction was upheld (agreed
with) Virginia “won”
Gibbons v.
Ogden
(1824)
New York gave Ogden
monopoly for ferrying on the
Hudson River, but Congress
had already given Gibbons
license to do the same; NY
court ruled Gibbons violated
state law
“Navigation” (particularly on a
river shared by multiple states)
is interstate commerce;
according to the Constitution,
only Congress may regulate
interstate commerce; New
York’s grant to Ogden was
illegal
Championed loose construction;
denied states the right to tax a
federal agency (“power to tax is
power to destroy”), weakening
states’ rights; Supreme Court
became very unpopular in south
and west
Loose interpretation of ‘contract’;
reinforced sanctity of contracts
(with federal protection); reasserts
judicial review of state laws
between private parties (even to
override decisions of state courts);
court was seen as supporting
property interests
Judicial review of state laws (states
had given up certain rights when
they had ratified the Constitution),
even if the state is party to the
case; purpose was to ensure
uniform enforcement of federal
laws; further blow to states’ rights
Reinforced federal supremacy over
interstate commerce; used loose
interpretation of commerce
(transportation = commerce);
promoted free enterprises, so long
as they comply with federal
regulations; very popular decision
among business interests
McCulloch v.
Maryland
(1819)
Dartmouth
College v.
Woodward
(1819)
Charters are legal contract,
therefore can’t be violated