Supreme Court Cases: The Marshall Court- Establishing Federal Supremacy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Supreme Court Cases: The Marshall Court- Establishing Federal Supremacy PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 6fd2f7-YzY1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Supreme Court Cases: The Marshall Court- Establishing Federal Supremacy

Description:

Supreme Court Cases: The Marshall Court- Establishing Federal Supremacy Main Cases Marbury v Madison (1803) McCulloch v Maryland (1819) Gibbons v Ogden (1824) – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:163
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 18
Provided by: VVSC
Learn more at: http://www.sjsd.k12.mo.us
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Supreme Court Cases: The Marshall Court- Establishing Federal Supremacy


1
Supreme Court CasesThe Marshall Court-
Establishing Federal Supremacy
Main Cases
  • Marbury v Madison (1803)
  • McCulloch v Maryland (1819)
  • Gibbons v Ogden (1824)

2
Judiciary Act of 1789
  • 1789 law that created the Judicial Branch of the
    federal government.
  • Things provided for in the Act
  • the number of members of the Supreme Court (6)
  • the number of lower district courts (13)
  • the idea that the Supreme Court can settle
    disputes between states
  • the idea that a decision by the Supreme Court is
    final.

3
Judiciary Act of 1801
  • Gave the President the power to appoint more
    federal judges.

4
Marbury v Madison (1803)
Historical Context
-In November 1800, Federalist President John
Adams lost his re-election bid to Anti-Federalist
Thomas Jefferson.
- Last minute, Adams appointed several Federalist
federal judges who were then approved by the
Senate.
-Knowing this, when Jefferson became President,
he ordered Sec. Of State James Madison not to
deliver the commission to William Marbury
-Marbury sued Madison in an attempt to gain his
post.
-Marbury asked the Supreme Court to rule on the
case
5
Issue
  • Whether Marbury deserved the Commission
  • Whether the Supreme Court could remedy his problem

6
Decision
-The Supreme Court and James Marshall found that
the Judiciary Act was unconstitutional because
it gave the powers to the SC and the
Constitution does not give Congress the power to
do that
-Established the precedent that the SC has the
final say on all laws (Judicial Review)
-Winner John Marshall-strengthened the power of
the SC
7
Legacy of Marbury Case
  • Established Judicial Review
  • More Power to Judicial Branch
  • Marshall Court Strengthen the power of the
    federal government

8
McCulloch v Maryland (1819)
Historical Context
-The state of Maryland brought an action against
James McCulloch, a cashier in the Maryland branch
of the Bank of the United States, for not paying
a tax the State had imposed on the US Bank.
9
Issue
Whether the state of Maryland had the right to
tax a federal agency which was properly set up by
the US Congress.
10
Decision
The Court ruled that the power to tax is the
power to destroy and that the federal
governments bank was immune to state taxation.
The Court reasoned that Congress could set up a
bank and write laws necessary and proper
according to its constitutional power to coin
and regulate money.
11
Other Significant Cases of the Marshall Court
Gibbons v Ogden (1824)- SC established broad
interpretation of the federal governments
authority over interstate commerce
12
The Case
  • Aaron Ogden filed a complaint in the Court of
    Chancery of New York asking the court to restrain
    Thomas Gibbons from operating on these waters.
    Ogden's lawyer contended that states often passed
    laws on issues regarding interstate matters and
    that states should have fully concurrent power
    with Congress on matters concerning interstate
    commerce.
  • Gibbons' lawyer, Daniel Webster, argued that
    Congress had exclusive national power over
    interstate commerce according to Article I,
    Section 8 of the Constitution and that to argue
    otherwise would result in confusing and
    contradictory local regulatory policies.
  • The Court of Chancery of New York and the Court
    of Errors of New York found in favor of Ogden and
    issued an injunction to restrict Gibbons from
    operating his boats. Gibbons appealed the case to
    the Supreme Court, which reversed the decision.

13
The Decision
  • The decision called Gibbons's federal license a
    legitimate exercise of the regulation of commerce
    provided in Article I, Section 8 of the
    Constitution. The New York State law creating a
    commercial monopoly was therefore void, since it
    conflicted with the regulatory power of the
    Federal Government in the performance of its
    constitutional responsibilities. The Court ruled
    that Gibbons must be allowed to operate within
    the waters of New York State.

14
Dred Scott v Sanford (1757)
  • Historical Context
  • Dredd Scott was a slave who forever changed the
    definition of property. He went with his master
    to Illinois and Minnesota and claimed that this
    made him a free man. The Missouri Supreme Court
    found otherwise. Scott, sued his new owner, John
    Sanford of New York, for damages, alleging
    physical abuse. A federal court ruled that Scott
    was a citizen. But the Supreme Court ruled
    otherwise. Chief Justice Roger Taney, in an 1857
    plurality opinion, said that African-Americans
    could never become United States citizens and
    that the Missouri Compromise was
    unconstitutional. Further, the Court said,
    Congress could not constitutionally exclude
    slavery from the territories.

15
Issue
  • Since the Missouri Compromise outlawed slavery in
    newly established territories and Scott moved
    with his owner to Minnesota, he was then
    considered a free man. The SC ruled against
    Scott stating that property does not have rights
    therefore Scotts claims of abuse were not valid

16
Decision
  • The Supreme Court ruled otherwise. Chief Justice
    Roger Taney, in an 1857 said that
    African-Americans could never become United
    States citizens and that the Missouri Compromise
    was unconstitutional. Further, the Court said,
    Congress could not constitutionally exclude
    slavery from the territories.

17
Review Questions
  • What did Marbury v Madison establish?
  • What powers were strengthened by Marshall Court
    decisions?
About PowerShow.com