Massucco 2. Mary Massucco. Professor Derosa. Pos4603 –

Plessy v. Ferguson , a very important case of 1896 in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the legality of racial segregation. At the time of the ruling, segregation between blacks and whites already existed in most schools, restaurants, and other public facilities in the American South. In the Plessy decision, the Supreme Court ruled that such segregation did not violate the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. This amendment provides equal protection of the law to all U.S. citizens, regardless of race. The court ruled in Plessy that racial segregation was legal as long as the separate facilities for blacks and whites were “equal.”

The case “Plessy v. Ferguson” was a test of a Louisiana law’s constitutionality. It took 50 years to realize it, but the constitutionally and morally right way was to end segregation. This case was never about Plessy not being able to ride on a white only car on a train headed to Covington, Louisiana. It was about a group of black citizens trying to stop segregation from ever

David O. Stewart, by profession, is a lawyer with a resume that includes everything from arguing appeals at the Supreme Court level to serving as a law court to the acclaimed Junior Powell. But in writing The Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution (specifically, I read the First Simon & Schuster trade paperback edition May 2008, copyrighted in 2007), he uses that experience in law to prove himself a gifted storyteller. Two hundred sixty-four pages long, this United States history nonfiction book does indeed have the substance to engage the reader throughout. It has special features that include two appendices featuring the elector system and the actual constitution of 1787, author’s notes, suggested further reading, acknowledgments and an index (which escalate the total length of the book to three hundred forty-nine pages long).

However, the state of Maryland tried to block the activity of the national bank by imposing tax to all the notes that were issued. The branch manager of the bank in Baltimore refused to pay taxes and lawsuits were filed in the Maryland Court. However, the case was brought up to the U.S Supreme Court as the Constitution did not subjectively describe that Federal Government had the authority to establish a bank. The U.S Supreme Court led by Chief Justice John Marshall ruled out the case that acknowledges that the Congress has the rights to establish a national bank under Article 1 Section 8 in the American Constitution. This shows that the US Constitution was vaguely described and gave the Congress an insight to pass laws as long as it is within the Constitution. However, this gave the Federal Government to create the mentality to indirectly gain more power which restricts the States sovereignty.

Moe and Howell point out that the Founders of the Constitution had agreed on an incomplete contract that does not explicitly state what decisions should be made under all current and future contingencies, but builds a governing structure consisting of the president, Congress, and the courts. It also shares powers among them, specifies procedures for public decision-making, and offers a framework of rules that allows leaders to make public decisions as well as handle any contingencies that may come up. The authors then explain that the three branches would fight with each other

The Federalists Papers were written in the eighteenth century by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay in an effort to persuade New Yorkers to ratify the new U.S. Constitution. These papers are said to be the key that unlocks the true interpretation and meaning of the Unites Sates Constitution. One of the controversial topics relating to the Constitution that the Federalists Papers help to straighten out, is the practice of judicial review by the Supreme Court. In this essay, I will point out many of the examples Alexander Hamilton gives in Federalist No. 78 that support the idea of the Supreme Court having power of judicial review over all levels of

In 1896 the United States Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutionally legal to segregate African Americans with their white counterparts. In the court case of Plessy v. Ferguson an African American man in Louisiana named Homer Plessy refused to follow the mandated Jim Crow laws which enforced that African Americans have to sit in a designated area when riding on a train. Plessy argued that his fourteenth amendment right was violated equal-protection clause, which “prohibits the states from denying “equal protection of the laws” to any person within their jurisdictions”(Duignan, 2016). However, when Plessy’s case moved to the Supreme Court they ruled“ the object of the Fourteenth Amendment was to create "absolute equality of the two races before the law," such equality extended only so far as political and civil rights (e.g., voting and serving on juries), not "social rights" (e.g., sitting in a railway car one chooses) (McBride, n.d. ). As a result, Plessy v. Ferguson

Alexander Hamilton wrote the majority of the Federalist Papers, a collection of essays intended to explain and defend the Constitution. In Federalist No. 78, Hamilton explains the powers of the courts. He viewed the courts as the least likely of all of the branches of government to impose upon or threaten the liberties and properties of Americans. Hamilton begins his argument by mentioning that federal judges serve for life. He explains that the reason for this lifelong term is to help the judges avoid pressures from other political powers or the popular opinion. Therefore, judges would also be the least likely to let their political agendas get in the way of Americans’ freedom and possessions.

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

The Federalist Papers contains eighty-five essays written by John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton. These essays were published anonymously under the name “Publius” in several different New York State news articles. The essays were written in hopes of persuading New Yorkers to ratify the United States Constitution. It contains detailed provisions of the Constitution. Today, the Federalist Papers are still in use to help those drafting the Constitution because James Madison and Alexander Hamilton were members of the Constitutional Convention.

One of Jefferson’s and Hamilton’s first disagreements began with the idea of a National Bank. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the Bank of the United States Jefferson protested because this was not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and stated that the Constitution’s writers could not have predicted the need of a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank of the United States was stated in the “elastic” or the “necessary and proper” clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. “This dilemma revisits the ever lasting dispute between the “strict constructionists” (Jefferson) who believed in the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond its clearly expressed provisions, and the “loose constructionists” (Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it said”. Just a few years later, under President Jefferson, the federal government of the United States

Alexander Hamilton's definiton of the Supreme Court's power of judicial review was argued in Federalist No. 78.

Hamilton discusses the powers of the judiciary in the Federalist papers essay no 78. He asserts that the judicial arm of the government is the least likely to threaten liberty and property of the citizens. Part of this assertion was brought about by his conviction and beliefs, that the judiciary was the weakest branch of government. The constitution spells out three branches of government which are independent of each other and perform different roles to the benefit of citizens. This document also spells out the checks and balances that help in regulating the three branches. For the judiciary, however, its nature of the roles makes it weakest. It also means that the role that judiciary plays in ensuring justice is meted upon every individual in the country makes it the least arm of government that can threaten individuals’ political rights.

In the Plessy v. Ferguson case, the statute of Louisiana, acts of 1890, c. 111 requires train companies to provide separate but equal usage for colored and white races. Plessy was a resident in the state of Louisiana which he was of mixed race as he was seven eighths caucasian and one eighth black. He tried to use the whites only train section and was arrested. Plessy then sued Louisiana State Supreme Justice, the Hon. John H. Ferguson for violating his 13th Amendment which prevents slavery and his 14th Amendment which is equal protection under US laws. (“Plessy v. Ferguson”, 1).

Continuing his writing of Federalist Number seventy-eight, Hamilton states that the Judiciary branch of the proposed government would ultimately be the weakest of the three branches, due to the fact that it had neither force nor will, but merely judgement. Federalist Number 78 quotes Montesquieu: "Of the three powers (…), the judiciary is next to nothing" (Hamilton). Because of the courts' weakness, Federalist Number seventy-eight does not see the possibility of corruption as a result of the use of judicial review as an issue. There was little concern that the judiciary might be able to overpower the other political branches. Since Congress controls the nation’s flow of money and the President holds the power to control the military, the courts did not have nearly the same amount of power and influence from a strict view of constitutional design. The Judiciary also has a need to depend on the executive and legislative branches to uphold its judgments, thus making it the least powerful. While the Executive and Legislative branches are elected by the people, members of the Judicial Branch are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The power given to courts to interpret the law, called jurisdiction, is limited for the judicial branch to federal and constitutional laws.