Resource: Marshall's View of Federalism

Print Background Essay

John Marshall is remembered for the decisions he made while Chief Justice of the United States. In addition to the important case McCulloch v. Maryland, Marshall wrote several other landmark decisions that illustrate the conflict between different branches of government and/or different levels of government.

John Adams, in the last hours before leaving office, signed over forty commissions, including one to appoint William Marbury as Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia. The new President and Adams' political enemy, Thomas Jefferson, ordered the Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver the commissions. Marbury, who had a rightful claim to the commission, requested that the Supreme Court order Madison to deliver it.

The power by which the Supreme Court could make that order came from the Judiciary Act of 1789. However, despite agreeing with Marbury's claim, Chief Justice John Marshall declared that as the Judiciary Act of 1789 could be interpreted as giving the Supreme Court more power than it was entitled to by the constitution, that act was unconstitutional. This was the first time an act that had been passed by Congress and signed by the President was declared unconstitutional.

Marshall was asserting the right of the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of laws. Marbury never got his commission, but through this decision, Chief Justice Marshall established the judicial branch as an equal partner with the executive and legislative branches.

The Cohen brothers sold Washington D.C. lottery tickets in Virginia, which was a violation of Virginia state law. They were convicted and fined by a Virginia Court, and upon appeal the Supreme Court found that the Virginia ruling had been a fair one.

But although the Supreme Court's ruling had not changed anything, its import lay in its tone. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that not only was it able to review state criminal proceedings, but that it was required to hear cases that involved constitutional questions. Marshall reasoned that when state laws and constitutions are repugnant to the Constitution and to federal laws, they are “absolutely void.”

Aaron Ogden held a New York state-granted monopoly license to ferry people between New York and New Jersey. Competitors, denied similar licenses by New York, secured one from the U.S. Congress. Thomas Gibbons held one such license.

Ogden argued that trafficking passengers was not commerce, and therefore did not conflict with Congress' regulation of commerce between states. The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that the concept of commerce included navigation and commercial intercourse generally. This essentially expanded the meaning of commerce and asserted Congress' power over it. In fact, this now extends to almost every kind of movement of persons, things, ideas, and communication, for commercial purposes or not, across state lines.

--adapted from the Web site Landmark Supreme Court Cases

Print Questions for Discussion

• What were Marshall's beliefs regarding the power of the federal government? In your answer, cite evidence from the video.
• What were Marshall's beliefs regarding the power of the judicial branch? In your answer, cite evidence from the video.
• In contemporary politics who might like Marshall's decisions? Who might dislike them?