The Great Chief Justice : John Marshall And The Rule Of Law

John Marshall, who had almost no formal schooling and studied law for only six weeks, nevertheless remains the only judge in American history whose distinction as a statesman derived almost entirely from his judicial career. John Marshall became the fourth chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1801. He is largely responsible for establishing the Supreme Court's role in federal government. Under Marshall, the Supreme Court adopted the practice of handing down a single opinion of the Court, allowing it to present a clear rule. John Marshall’s principles established legal precedents and formed the cornerstone of the government and altered the economy for the better.

The views of Scalia and Brennan of our common law judicial system are very oppositional. Justice Brennan is what is considered a non-orginalist and Scalia would be a considered the opposite which is, an orginalist. Both of them agree that interpreting the constitution is so crucial to our democratic system and to making laws. However, Scalia believes that judges shouldn’t have the power to interpret the constitution into common laws because it allows for too much bias in our court system. He believes it gives the courts too much power and that they don’t have the historical knowledge base to interpret the original intent of constitution properly. Scalia thinks that this job of interpretation of important amendments would be better left to historians then to lawyers. He does not think that judges should be allowed to create laws because they don’t know how to interpret the original intent of the constitution. Justice Brennan believes that the interpretation of the constitution into common law is for a federal judge, obligatory. And that it is the job of the judges to look at the cases presented to them and use their best unbiased judgment to interpret what outcome would be best for the public good. Justice Brennan says himself that when the justices interpret the constitution they don’t speak for themselves, they speak for the public. Scalia and Brennan basically disagree on how the text should be read and about what should be considered legitimate interpretation. There

In America’s time there have been many great men who have spent their lives creating this great country. Men such as George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson fit these roles. They are deemed America’s “founding fathers” and laid the support for the most powerful country in history. However, one more man deserves his name to be etched into this list. His name was John Marshall, who decided case after case during his role as Chief Justice that has left an everlasting mark on today’s judiciary, and even society itself. Through Cases such as Marbury v. Madison (1803) and McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) he established the Judicial Branch as an independent power. One case in particular, named Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), displayed his

Fortas’ main obstacle with the Gideon case was proving that counsel was necessary to Justices Frankfurter and Black who symbolically represented two differing judicial philosophies. Justice Frankfurter was often associated with the phrase “Judicial self restraint”. His ideology preferred judicial matters to be solved within congress and the states. Frankfurter believed that relying too much on judges would hinder the freedoms of the people and corrupt the nation’s concept of democracy. Justice John Marshall

If Marshall’s actions were iconic, then after the Marbury v. Madison case, he would have been credited with the creation of judicial review. In reality, Marshall’s decision of allowing the courts to review the decisions of the legislative and executive branches was seen “as only a step in the continuous clarification of the theory of judicial function”(Clinton 117). So this supposed creator of a pivotal Judicial component was only seen as a stepping stone. Through the remainder of Marshall’s career as Chief Justice, no one revisited his thoughts on the Marbury v. Madison case, until his successor, Roger Taney, did in Dred Scott v. Sanford. Roger Taney seemed to have the same viewpoints as Marshall, always trying to keep the checks and balances intact and equal. He kept this dedication through the Dred Scott v. Sandford case, using judicial review to rule the Missouri Compromise of 1820 unconstitutional. Strangely, “Marbury’s importance as a precedent for judicial review of legislation was never mentioned by the Court”(Clinton 119). If Marbury v. Madison was such a pivotal case, then it would

Based on the research of Justice Alito, he was appointed by former president Gorge W. Bush as one of the Supreme Court Justices on January 31, 2006 and is currently a Republican Party federal justice. His approaches to things are very unpredictable and distinctive from what he is viewed as. However, his conservative standpoint is still a part of his image. This paper will include: the background of the justice, the judicial philosophy he approaches, and his opinion on a dispute.

Alexander Hamilton’s essay is mainly about the importance of having an independent judiciary branch and its ability to strike down laws passed by Congress which are believed to be “contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution.” The rest of the essay, for the most part, deals with structure of federal courts, their jurisdiction and powers, the methods used in appointing judges and other related issues.

“The most impressive by-product of the War of 1812 was a heightened nationalism” (240). With John Marshall in position as Chief Justice, judicial nationalism was unmistakable by the way he stood his and the government’s ground (248). One example of this was evident by the Cohens v. Virginia case in which Marshall declared that the Supreme Court has the ultimate power in the federal government, even though Virginia had correctly dealt with the illegal-lottery-ticket-selling Cohens (249). However, judicial nationalism wasn’t the only factor that transpired – there was also political nationalism. A man named Henry Clay came up with the American System, or the three-part plan to bring America to more wealth and unity (241). The ingredients for this “American System” recipe called for a stable bank, people’s payment under a tariff, and as a result of those first two parts, roads, canals, and other means of transportation would emerge (241). This American System was more significant than the mere judicial system because its roads would affect everyone “from the South and West to the North and East” (241). Clay’s idea was issued to all the people, while the judicial changes brought on by Marshall’s Court most likely only affected the people involved in the case and the government. As stated by a New York newspaper, Marshall “[strengthened the] government at the expense of the people”

The Marshall Court has left numerous legacies in place in order to help establish this great nation. Chief Justice Marshall was a man that had many impacts on our Government from strengthening the authority of the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison, which gave the courts judicial review, to Gibbons v. Ogden, which gave the national government undeniable power over interstate commerce by ruling a New York steamboat monopoly invalid. There were many other cases as well that were important to the government’s growth; such as Fletcher v. Peck that made it where a state law can never overthrow anything that came against the Federal Constitution. Chief Justice Marshall presided over many cases and ruled over such cases in a way that he felt would benefit the ever growing American nation. Through it all he helped establish three legacies; helping to make the federal government supreme over all things that would control the economy, he also helped to open the pathway where there’s an increased federal part to be played in economic growth, and finally in an effort to further any and all new industrial capitalist economy, he helped to make permanent protection for corporations and private businesses so that the states couldn’t interfere. These legacies helped to establish a better American nation in more ways that we can know. A key part of all of this

“That’s when my first direct thought occurred: I want to kill them all” (Patterson 18). Private Games is set in London, England at the Private Investigations London office. The 2012 Olympic games in London are about to happen and a Games organizing committee chair was ruthlessly murdered. The man that claims to have killed organizing committee chair, Sir Denton Marshall, sends a letter to reporter Karen Pope who is working the games as a sports reporter. The man calls himself Cronus promising to bring the games back to their Ancient Glory. The main investigator on this case for Private Investigations is Peter Knight. Peter has close ties to this case due to the fact that Sir Denton Marshall was his mother’s fiancé. Pope and Knight will have

Currie, D. (1992), the Constitution in the Supreme Court: The First Hundred Years, 1789-1988, Pges152-155 (Univ. of Chicago).

This could not be truer and better expressed about the rule of governance. That is why James Madison and men like him sought after the influence of some of the greatest minds; Charles Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu, Mark Kishlansky, and Thomas Paine. Each of these men are different in their own rights but all strive for the common accomplishment of the perfect balance and formula for the government and their public. Throughout my term paper elaborate on Montesquieu’s “Spirit of Laws” chapters twenty two through twenty-six, Mark Kishlansky “a Monarchy Transformed: Britain 1603-1714” chapters one through two. I will then go on to discuss Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” and then return to Montesquieu “Spirit of Laws” chapters one through thirteen. From these readings, I will go on and discuss their summary of ideas, events, and/or ways of thinking that influenced the constitution. I will also identify the amendments that were influenced by these readings as well.

The life of every American citizen, whether they realize it or not, is influenced by one entity--the United States Supreme Court. This part of government ensures that the freedoms of the American people are protected by checking the laws that are passed by Congress and the actions taken by the President. While the judicial branch may have developed later than its counterparts, many of the powers the Supreme Court exercises required years of deliberation to perfect. In the early years of the Supreme Court, one man’s judgement influenced the powers of the court systems for years to come. John Marshall was the chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835, and as the only lasting Federalist influence in a newly Democratic-Republican

In everyday life people can do common to uncommon things. From toddlers eating up toys to people vandalizing properties. Yes we are given in life rights as citizens but nevertheless there is a certain extent to what we can and can’t do. Authority is given to the government to protect the people and to keep the world stable.Of course there’s been cases where “Social Necessity” isn’t used in a way for the public to feel safe and there for people create protests and riots to incorporate their point of view.

I think that I possess a number of qualities that a Chief Justice should have. A Chief Justice should be able to eloquently express themselves clearly, concisely, and grammatically through speech. Over the summer, I went to Stanford for a speech and debate camp, where I learned how to write and deliver speeches. I also have an extensive range of vocabulary words at my disposal. Moreover, I have gone to numerous high school interviews, so I know how to remain composed, think on my feet, and express myself. Candidates for an appellate position must also have superior writing skills. The last Supreme Court case we did, I built a strong and thorough argument and my team won the case. I also have experience moderating and asking