Sunday, February 4, 2024

Chapter 6: 1801-1805, John Marshall and judicial review

John Adams and the Federalists had been soundly defeated. Thomas Jefferson would be the next president of the United States of America. Then, suddenly, Providence smiled on the Federalists again. Chief Justice Ellsworth resigned his position.

2 “I have an opportunity to provide a check on the mischief of Jefferson and his Republicans,” Adams thought. “I need a loyal Federalist with the discernment and strength to oppose whatever pernicious devices these people are planning to introduce when they have taken over here.”

3 After considering a number of alternatives, he first offered the position to the man whom Washington had appointed as the first chief justice, John Jay. Jay, however was not interested in returning to captain an institution which he (along with almost everyone else) felt was weak and ineffectual.

4 The President turned to Secretary of State John Marshall for advice. “Do you have any suggestions?” he asked. “William Paterson would be a good choice,” Marshall replied. “That appointment might offend some,” the President countered. Then Adams turned and walked away from Marshall. “I suppose I will have to nominate you!” he exclaimed.

5 Marshall was surprised, but he did not decline the appointment. “I will do my best, Sir,” was all that he could muster. “That is just what I wanted to hear,” Adams smiled.

6 By the end of January, the Senate had confirmed the nomination, and Marshall had assumed his place on the bench in February. The court was meeting in a room on the first floor of the capitol building at the time, but everyone in Washington was too preoccupied with the preparations for the inauguration of the new president to take much notice of Marshall or his new accommodations at the capitol.

7 A few days before the event, the President-elect wrote to the new Chief Justice: “Will you do me the honor of administering the oath of office?” “The honor would be mine,” Marshall replied. Adams, however, refused to suffer the further humiliation of seeing his political nemesis formally elevated to the position that he felt should have been his for another four years, and he quietly slipped out of town the night before the ceremony was to take place.

8 “We are all Republicans – we are all Federalists,” Jefferson proclaimed in his inaugural address. “I hope that he means that,” Marshall thought. There would no doubt be plenty of opportunities to test his sincerity over the months and years that followed.

9 One such opportunity presented itself almost immediately. In the final hours of his administration, President Adams had signed and sealed a number of appointments to Federalists and left them with the Department of State (which had the actual responsibility for issuing them). Thomas Jefferson, however, did not like the idea of delivering the commissions made by his predecessor. As a consequence, Adams’ appointees did not receive their commissions and were very unhappy.

10 “This is an outrage, and it must not be allowed to stand,” one of the appointees for justice of the peace proclaimed. His name was William Marbury. Still, he waited for several months to see what the new administration would do. Finally, after it became abundantly clear that Jefferson had no intention of issuing the commissions or personally reappointing the men in question, Marbury (and a few others) petitioned the Supreme Court to require Secretary of State James Madison to explain why the commissions had been withheld.

11 In the meantime, while Federalists and Republicans squabbled over which side would prevail in receiving the justice of the peace appointments, John Marshall was beginning to see an opportunity to make a much more profound and consequential statement with this case. As he listened to the attorneys’ arguments in the case, the conviction grew within him that it had the potential to set a big precedent for the role that the judiciary would play in the new republic.

12 The Judicial Act of 1789 had given the Supreme Court the power to issue a writ of mandamus to government officials (an order requiring them to perform the legal requirements of their office). In this case, the writ would compel the Secretary of State to issue the commissions.

13 “The Constitution, however, does not give that power to the court,” Marshall protested. The real question for Marshall was: “whether an act of the legislature can supersede or negate a provision in the constitution, and everyone should know the answer to that.”

14 Hence, although he could order Madison to deliver the commissions to the Federalists and score a minor triumph for his party, the Chief Justice chose to play this one for history. “The Constitution is either paramount, or it is equal to legislative acts and can be altered at the whim of the legislature. If the Constitution is paramount, then any legislative act which contradicts it is not law,” Marshall explained. “The court must, therefore, be the final arbiter in deciding whether or not some act of the legislature conforms to the superior standard of the Constitution,” he concluded.

15 Thus, the provision in the Judicial Act of 1789 that had given the Supreme Court the power to issue a writ of mandamus in these circumstances was unconstitutional and could not be used. The writ would not be issued. Technically, the Jefferson Administration had won the point; but the Federalist Chief Justice had cannily established the precedent of judicial review for all future acts of the other two branches of government. In short, Marshall’s court would be the check (which Adams had envisioned when he had appointed him) on any Republican actions that threatened the republic he had helped to found and shape.

16 Moreover, the various justices had been in the practice of issuing separate opinions prior to the arrival of Marshall as their chief. “Hereafter, the Court will present one opinion to the people,” he had declared. As a consequence, John Marshall transformed the court in just a few short years from a weak and ineffectual appendage of the government to be a truly coequal partner with the executive and legislative branches.

17 Thomas Jefferson was furious with Marshall for what he regarded as overreach. “We need more of our people in the judiciary!” he declared. Then, as if on que, Associate Justice Alfred Moore resigned the following year and gave the President the opportunity to nominate his first justice to the Supreme Court.

18 “The opinion that it is the prerogative of these judges to declare certain acts of the executive and the legislature as unconstitutional has the potential to make the judiciary a despotic branch of government,” Jefferson told his nominee, William Johnson. “I would also like to see separate opinions in these cases, but the Chief Justice will only allow us to see one,” he added in frustration.

19 John Marshall, however, was just getting started. And Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t be the last President to disagree with his decisions or be frustrated by his “meddling.”

20 Now John Marshall was the great grandson of Thomas Marshall and Martha Sherwood, who were the parents of Mary and John Marshall.

21 Mary married Thomas Camp, and they had a son also named Thomas. It was this Thomas Camp who was the father of the two brothers who had served in the Revolutionary War.

22 Mary’s brother John was also the forefather of General George C. Marshall.


No comments:

Post a Comment