The Founders Of The Supreme Court System

The role of the Judicial Branch of the United States has been the most dynamic throughout the Nation’s history. By adopting the power of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison in 1803, the Supreme Court established its position as being arguably the most powerful branch of Federal Government. However, this also made the Judiciary’s role the most controversial. Should the Court be required to interpret the constitution strictly through the language it contains? Does the Court have the right to overturn morals legislation? Through analyzing court cases like Lawrence v. Texas, one can gain insight on the role of the Supreme Court and how it fits within the confines of the United States Government.

Before the Marshall Court, the United States Supreme Court functioned much like the courts in England in which more than one judge offered his decision on the case at hand. Shortly after becoming Chief Justice, Marshall changed this English tradition so that only one opinion was delivered by one of the justices, most often the Chief Justice (Rehnquist 40). By changing this tradition John Marshall set the U.S. Supreme Court apart from the English Courts at the time and began to define our unique judicial system.

The Supreme Court was established in 1789, with its powers stated in Article III of the newly-ratified United States Constitution. In the years leading up to the Marshall era, the Court was little more than a shadow of its future self. It lacked both the prestige and authority of the latter 19th century. John Jay–and his successors, Rutledge and Ellsworth–oversaw few cases, and ever fewer significant ones. Often cited as an example of the early Court’s inefficiency, their most

Marshall complained that the Constitution is the “supreme law of the land” and that the Supreme Court ultimately has the final say so when it comes to evaluating the meaning of the Constitution. Marshall states, “ lt is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” To present Marshall’s initial plea at hand, Marshall argues that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional. In Marshall 's perspective, Congress could not present the Supreme Court with the power to issue an order granting Marbury his commission. Only the Constitution could do so, and the document said nothing about the Supreme Court having the power to issue such an order. Thus, the Supreme Court could not force Jefferson and Madison to appoint Marbury, because it did not have the power to do so.

The establishment of one of the most influential powers of the Supreme Court--the power of judicial review-- and the development of the judicial branch can be attributed to Marshall’s insightful interpretation of the Constitution ("The Marshall Court”).

Marbury, one of the “midnight judges” of 1801, was named a justice of peace for the District of Columbia, but he soon learned that his commission was being put off by James Madison. So, he sued. Marshall realized that the executive branch, completely controlled by Jeffersonians, could easily reject his ruling for his Federalist friend and lessen the power of the Judicial branch at the same time. He dismissed Marbury’s case, but also said that the basis of Marbury’s argument –the Judiciary Act of 1789 –was unconstitutional, thus establishing the establishing the principle of judiciary review, the principle by which courts can declare acts of either the executive branch or the legislative branch

Marshall believed that congress could not give the supreme court the power to give Marbury his commission and that the Constitution only could. Furthermore the document said nothing about the Supreme Court having the power to issue such an order, thus making the Supreme Court not being able to force Jefferson and Madison to appoint Marbury as Peace of Justice. While Marbury never became a justice of peace, the court’s ruling in Marbury V Madison was a very important Precedent.( A legal decision that serves as an example in later court cases.) This eventually created the Judicial review which gave the court the right to review acts of congress and the action of the president. If the Court saw the law as unconstitutional, they could overrule the law. However at the end Marshall ended says that the Supreme Court has the final say on

The federal judiciary was established as a significant institution in 1801. President John Adams was leaving the office involuntarily and feared the death of the Federalist Party. He thought he could keep it going in the court system by appointing John Marshall as Chief Justice of the United States and the Judiciary Act of 1801 was another part of his plan. The law relieved the Supreme Court Justices from riding circuit and holding court away from home for the older men. It created circuit judgeships, which would be filled by Federalists. The Chief Justice appointment and the Judiciary Act made the courts a great political battleground. The Supreme Court was the main target because it was not considered a significant institution and received little attention. As Chief Justice, John Jay felt his duties so light that he became American minister to the Court of St. James?s and then to campaign successfully for governor of New York. He did not consider a second appointment to be worthwhile. Also, Oliver Ellsworth as Chief Justice had enough time to be a minister to France in 1800. It was not considered unusual for John Marshall to continue to be Secretary of State in the Adams administration for one month while he was serving as Chief Justice. (2)

President John Adams had made many federal appointments. He did this at the very end of his term. One of the appointments was William Marbury. Thomas Jefferson, refused to recognize the appointment of Marbury. The normal practice of making such appointments was to deliver a "commission," or notice, of appointment. This was normally done by the Secretary of State. Jefferson's Secretary of State at the time was James Madison. Madison refused to deliver Marbury's commission. Marbury sued Madison. This led Supreme Court to take the case. Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that the Judiciary Act of 1789. This act spelled out the practice of delivering commissions for judges and justices of the peace. This was unconstitutional because it the gave

In the extremely bitter presidential election of 1800, Thomas Jefferson ousted John Adams after only one term. In his final days as President, however, Adams appointed several new judicial officers. Shortly afterward, when Jefferson took over as President, he blocked the appointees from assuming office by refusing to deliver the necessary commissions to those who had not yet received them. William Marbury, one of the appointees who did not receive his commission, took his case directly to the Supreme Court. Remarkably, the member of the Administration responsible for delivering the commissions to Marbury and the other appointees was the new Secretary of State – none other than James Madison. Ultimately, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall ruled in 1803, in the case of Marbury v. Madison, that although the Jefferson Administration’s decision to withhold the commissions was not legal, the Court had no jurisdiction over the matter because the federal legislation allowing Marbury take his case directly to the Supreme Court (the Judiciary Act of 1789) was itself

Established in 1789, the Supreme Court was created to interpret the meaning of the Constitution and to use that interpretation to declare any actions of the Legislative or Executive Branches unconstitutional. However, the Supreme Court was capable of also acquiring more functions as evidence of the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison (1803). The case dealt with President John Adams appointing sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Colombia. Adams appointed these justices so that his political party would have more justices than the rival party. Problematically, the appointment letters were not delivered by the end of his term. By that basis, President Thomas Jefferson annulled the appointments because he retained the right to appoint the justices during his time of jurisdiction. Consequently, this aggravated the appointed justice and therefore one of the justices named William Marbury filed a case in the Supreme Court over the commissions that they were promised (Goldstone). The Court ruled that Marbury did have a right to commission and also with it made a statement that enacted the doctrine of Judicial Review. This meant that the court had the "right to review, and possibly nullify, laws and governmental acts that violate the constitution. Judicial Review is a means of assuring that politicians and various other leaders adhere to the constitution and do not use powers granted to them by

In the weeks after John Adams lost his bid for re-election to Thomas Jefferson in 1800, the Federalist Congress increased the number of circuit courts. Adams placed Federalist judges in these new positions. One of the justices of the peace, William Marbury, filed a writ of mandamus demanding Secretary of State James Madison deliver the appointments. The Supreme Court led by John Marshall denied the request citing part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 as unconstitutional. This historic court case established the concept of Judicial Review or the ability of the Judiciary Branch to declare a law unconstitutional. This case brought the Judicial Branch of the government

During the election of 1800, political parties were drastic in the American government. President John Adams and Vice president Thomas Jefferson had different supporters. Federalist supported one side and Republicans supported the other. At the peak of this election, Federalist lost both the presidency and the control of both houses of Congress. The judiciary branch was the only branches were powers could be exercised. The federalist driven congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801,. that originated 62 new judgeships. This was an attempt by Federalists in Congress and the John Adams administration to fill the Federal courts with his supporters. After hearing about “midnight judges” causes Jefferson to withhold the commissions

When the United States Constitution was established, the founding fathers devised the core of the court system that is present in today’s society. The state and federal government each have a version of a Supreme Court which is typically led by a Chief Justice. The states level Supreme Court Justice governs the issues that pertains to the citizens within the respective state. These individuals will also take part in hearings or proceedings that impact of law of the state and hear constitutional cases with regards to the state. On the federal side, a Supreme Court Chief Justice will operates more on a national

This situation seemed to have changed drastically in 1801 when President John Adams appointed John Marshall of Virginia to be the fourth Chief Justice. Confident that nobody would tell him not to, Marshall took clear and firm steps to define the role and powers of both the Supreme Court and the judiciary system. This is something that seemed to have gone unnoticed so far.