John Marshall

[[File:John Marshall by Henry Inman, 1832.jpg|165px|thumb|right|John Marshall]]{{law}}
{{cquote|[A] [[Constitution]] is framed for ages to come, and is designed to approach [[immortality]] as nearly as human institutions can approach it. Its course cannot always be tranquil.|||Chief Justice John Marshall, ''Cohens v. Virginia'' majority opinion.<ref>[https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/264/  Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821)].</ref>}}

'''John Marshall''' {{lived|1755|1835}} was an [[American]] [[Founding Father]] most famous for his work as the fourth Chief Justice of the [[United States Supreme Court]] from 1801 to 1835. Before this, he served as the Secretary of State under President [[John Adams]] and a US Representative from his home state of [[Virginia]]. This makes him one of the few Americans to have served in all three branches of the federal government, and his actions have continued to shape how the US federal government interacts with state governments.

He is most remembered for his work in the US Supreme Court, on which he was a very influential figure able to sway his fellow justices. In 1803, he pushed for and wrote the Court's opinion on the ''Marbury v. Madison'' case, in which the Court upheld the principle of judicial review. This established that US courts have the ability to evaluate and potentially invalidate federal and state laws based on whether they adhered to the [[United States Constitution]]. Judicial review is a core part of American [[separation of powers]]. 

Marshall's decisions also expanded the power of the federal government versus the states, and he specifically helped put the "Supreme" in the Supreme Court. In ''McCulloch v. Maryland'', Marshall's opinion, unanimously backed by his fellow justices, held that [[Congress]] has powers not specifically elaborated in the Constitution and could therefore establish a national bank free from state taxation.<ref>[https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/17us316 McCulloch v. Maryland]. ''Oyez.''</ref> In ''Cohens v. Virginia'', Marshall and his fellow justices ruled that the US Supreme Court had the authority to review cases from state supreme courts.<ref>[https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/19us264 Cohens v. Virginia]. ''Oyez.''</ref> In ''Gibbons v. Ogden'', the Court held that Congress had the power under the [[Commerce Clause]] to regulate means of transportation.<ref name="gvo">[https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/22us1 Gibbons v. Ogden] ''Oyez''</ref> Congress has since applied this to [[Rail transportation|railroads]], freeways and television and [[radio]] broadcasts.

In one of the darkest moments of American history, Marshall wrote the majority opinion in the 1832 ''Worcester v. Georgia'' case, holding that [[Georgia]] could not allow its citizens to violate treaties with the Cherokee, or any other [[Native American]] Nation, as the treaties had been negotiated by the US federal government.<ref>[https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/31us515 Worcester v. Georgia]. ''Oyez.''</ref> This wasn't a dark moment because of Marshall; he made the right call here. No, things went sideways because the US president at the time was one [[Andrew Jackson]], who was determined to expropriate land from Native Americans. Jackson thus refused to enforce the decision and allowed Georgia [[militias]] to begin forcing the Cherokee off their tribal lands, beginning a series of events which would culminate in [[Trail of Tears|their forced removal in 1838]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Sundquist |first=Matthew L. |year=2010 |title=Worcester v. Georgia: A Breakdown In The Separation Of Powers |journal=American Indian Law Review |volume=35 |issue= 1|pages=239–255 |url=https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1100&context=ailr}}</ref>

When Marshall died in 1835, President Jackson nominated [[Roger Taney]] to replace him, and this nomination passed the [[US Senate]].<ref>[https://www.judges.org/news-and-info/reflections-from-the-bench-roger-b-taney-one-decision-makes-a-legacy-part-i/ Roger B. Taney: One Decision Makes a Legacy, Part I]. ''National Judicial College.''</ref> Taney proved to be a far inferior justice, authoring the infamous ''[[Dred Scott v. Sandford]]'' decision, which upheld [[slavery]] in all US land, denied the legality of Black citizenship, and set the stage for the [[American Civil War]] by invalidating the [[Missouri]] Compromise.<ref>[https://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/africanamerican/scott/scott.asp Missouri's Dred Scott Case, 1846-1857]. Missouri Secretary of State.</ref> One guy makes a lot of difference.

A controversial figure in his day, he is quite possibly the most important voice of the Federalist cause from his era. John Adams said in 1825 “The proudest act of my life was the gift of John Marshall to the people of the United States.”<ref>[https://www.whitehousehistory.org/the-midnight-appointments The Midnight Appointments]</ref> [[Thomas Jefferson]], on the other hand, viewed him as "very irregular and very censurable."<ref>[https://csac.history.wisc.edu/multimedia/founders-on-the-founders/john-marshall/ John Marshall]</ref> 

==The man who created judicial review==
John Marshall is most famous for being the person who created the concept of judicial review in the United States, specifically through the case ''Marbury v. Madison''. Essentially, this means the Supreme Court has the power to overturn even laws passed by Congress if they are found to be unconstitutional, because "it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeVrUzoyZV4 How The Supreme Court Is Undermining Democracy - SOME MORE NEWS]</ref>

Essentially, a few days before Adams left office and was replaced with Jefferson, whom Adams hated, he appointed several people to the lower courts who agreed with him politically. However, the commissions in question were not able to be delivered before Adams left office, and Jefferson ordered his Secretary of State, [[James Madison]], to only deliver some commissions, specifically to judges he liked. One of the people appointed by Adams who never got a commission was William Marbury, who was outraged that Madison refused to allow him to do a job he had gotten.<ref name=Beat>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLTCf1NMAj4 Why the Supreme Court Is Relevant | Marbury v. Madison]</ref> 

Many have said that Marshall had a massive conflict of interest regarding this case: You see, Marshall was Secretary of State at the time the Adams Administration underwent the aforementioned plan. Because of this, it was his job to give people like Marbury the very commissions Madison refused to give him.<ref name=Beat/> On this notion, Britannica states:

{{quotebox|Some scholars have questioned whether Marshall should have removed himself from the case because of his prior service as Adams’ secretary of state (1800–01). Certainly, later judicial standards would have called for recusal, but at the time only financial connections to a case led judges to step aside, as Marshall did in suits regarding [[Virginia]] lands in which he had an interest. The [[Democratic-Republican Party|Democratic-Republicans]] (progenitor of the [[Republican Party]]), always quick to criticize Marshall, did not even raise the issue of the propriety of his sitting in the case.<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/event/Marbury-v-Madison Marbury v. Madison]</ref>}}

[[File:Marbury V. Madison.jpg|200px|thumb|right|''Marbury v. Madison'' made simple<ref>[https://x.com/SimpleSCOTUS/status/1540048107135705089 Marbury V. Madison (1803)]</ref>]]

Jefferson was outraged, writing on this ruling that "The [[United States Constitution|Constitution]], on this [[hypothesis]], is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they may please."<ref>''The Crash of 2016: The Plot to Destroy American&nbsp— and What We Can Do to Stop It'' by Thom Hartmann</ref>{{rp|216}} The notion was controversial and has been used by both the left and the right on the court to achieve similarly controversial ends. What scholars refer to as the ''Lochner'' era, named after the case ''Lochner v. New York'' where this point in history started, saw conservatives on the court use this power to stop essentially any regulation governments passed.<ref>[https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/lochner_era Lochner era]</ref> Meanwhile, the Warren Court, named after Chief Justice [[Earl Warren]], used this power to [[desegregate]] [[public schools]], force the government to provide a lawyer to those who cannot afford one, strike down laws against [[birth control]], and create the modern notion of "one person, one vote."<ref>[https://supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-courts/warren-court-1953-1969/ The Warren Court, 1953-1969]</ref>

One of the infamous moments in United States history came from an example of judicial review being ignored, that being the [[Trail of Tears]]. Marshall, who was still on the court, ruled in ''Worcester v. Georgia'' that the land of Native Americans doubled as sovereign nations which states had no right to rule. After this ruling, both then-President Andrew Jackson and the states which were engaging in these practices did nothing, and essentially pretended the ruling never occurred.<ref>[https://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/trail-of-tears Trail of Tears]</ref> Jackson is even alleged to have said "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."<ref>[https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/history2.html Court History]</ref> Still, on the other end, another infamous moment in United States history, ''Dred Scott v. Sandford'' also saw the Supreme Court use its power of judicial review to declare something unconstitutional, in that case the Missouri Compromise.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znzyPlk4Zy4 The Supreme Court Case That Led to The Civil War | Dred Scott v. Sandford]</ref>

==Putting the "federal" in federalist==
Another important case Marshall started was ''McCulloch v. Maryland'', which created the notion of implied powers in the Constitution and determined that federal law was supreme.<ref name=McCulloch>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EOKIB9Glv4 Does Congress Have Implied Powers? | McCulloch v. Maryland]</ref>

The case came out after The Second Bank of the United States was opened in the state of [[Maryland]], which then passed a law saying that all banks not chartered by the state had to pay a tax. James McCulloch, who headed this bank, was outraged and sued the state, which made its way to the Supreme Court. The court ruled that Maryland had no power to tax the bank because it would be a violation of the supremacy clause, and that Congress had the power to open a National Bank despite said power not being explicitly given in the Constitution.<ref name=McCulloch/> Due to its importance in determining what powers the federal government has, it has been called "one of [Marshall's] most important decisions regarding the expansion of Federal power."<ref>[https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/mcculloch-v-maryland McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)]</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Marshall, John}}
[[Category:Former U.S. Cabinet Members]]
[[Category:Former United States Representatives]]
[[Category:Founding Fathers]]
[[Category:Lawyers]]
[[Category:United States history]]
[[Category:United States politicians]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Justices]]

Categories: Former U.S. Cabinet Members, Former United States Representatives, Founding Fathers, Lawyers, United States history, United States politicians, United States Supreme Court Justices