Legal History Commons^™

John Marshall And Felix Frankfurter: An Icon And A Disappointment?, William E. Nelson

Touro Law Review

This article shows how Chief Justice John Marshall first developed the doctrine of judicial restraint in Marbury v. Madison to assure the public that the Supreme Court would not engage in politically oriented judicial review as colonial courts had in holding Parliament’s 1765 Stamp Act unconstitutional. Justice Felix Frankfurter, in contrast, adopted judicial restraint differently—by reading the scholarship of James Bradley Thayer. This article also shows that Frankfurter did not abandon his commitment to judicial restraint when during his years on the bench it began to serve conservative purposes rather than the progressive purposes it had once served.

Playing With Words: Amar’S Nationalist Constitution, Robert J. Pushaw Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

This essay provides a balanced critique of Akhil Amar’s important book on early constitutional theory and practice. On the one hand, Amar’s work has three unique virtues. First, unlike other constitutional historians, he does not examine a particular clause or a brief time period (such as 1787‑1789), but rather analyzes the Constitution as a whole from 1760 to 1840. This holistic and longitudinal approach enables him to trace in detail the evolving constitutional views of America’s leading Founders—John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Marshall, and George Washington—and the personal relationships among those men that helped shape those …

Les Deux Constitutions De John Marshall : Une Relecture De L’Arrêt Marbury V. Madison, Elisabeth Zoller

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Marshaling Mcculloch, Richard A. Primus

Reviews

David Schwartz’s terrific new book is subtitled John Marshall and the 200-Year Odyssey of McCulloch v. Maryland. But the book is about much more than Marshall and McCulloch. It’s bout the long struggle over the scope of national power. Marshall and McCulloch are characters in the story, but the story isn’t centrally about them. Indeed, an important part of Schwartz’s narrative is that McCulloch has mattered relatively little in that struggle, except as a protean symbol.

Mcculloch V. Marbury, Kermit Roosevelt Iii, Heath Khan

All Faculty Scholarship

This article builds on recent scholarship about the origins and creation of “our Marbury”—the contemporary understanding of the case and its significance—to argue that Marbury is in fact wholly unsuited for the role it plays in Supreme Court rhetoric and academic instruction. While Marbury is generally understood to support aggressive judicial review, or actual invalidation of a government act, it offers no guidance at all for how judicial review should be employed in particular cases—in particular, whether review should be aggressive or deferential. The actual opinion in Marbury makes no effort to justify its lack of deference to the …

Interest And Irritation: Brown V. Maryland And The Making Of A National Economy, Henry P. Callegary

Legal History Publications

This paper examines the United States Supreme Court case Brown v. Maryland, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 419 (1827), which struck down Maryland’s licensing fee on wholesalers of imported goods. In doing so, the Court reaffirmed its commitment to a national economic policy, instead of a state-centric system. This paper explores the context of the decision, including profiles of the parties involved, the attorneys for both sides, the lower court decisions, and the majority opinion and dissent from the United States Supreme Court. Additionally, this paper follows the lineage of the case through to the present day, examining its doctrinal impact …

Glimpses Of Marshall In The Military, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

Before President John Adams appointed him as Chief Justice of the United States in 1801, John Marshall was a soldier, a state legislator, a federal legislator, an envoy to France, and the Secretary of State. He also maintained a thriving practice in Virginia and federal courts, occasionally teaming up with political rival and personal friend Patrick Henry. Forty-five years old at the time of his appointment to the Supreme Court, Marshall has been serving his state and his country for a quarter century before he took judicial office. Marshall is an exemplar of professional excellence for all lawyers and judges. …

Livingston & Gilchrist V. The Maryland Insurance Co. (1813): A Testament To Judicial Flexibility, Kathleen Lord Fallon

Legal History Publications

Barely a month before Justice Brockholst Livingston joined the Supreme Court of the United States, a ship he commissioned with a cargo of $50,000, was captured by the British and condemned. The circumstances of the vessel’s voyage led to its capture; she sailed as an American merchant ship under a Spanish license with an American crew. When seized as a prize, the British found papers showing conflicting information concealed amongst the crew belongings. Justice Livingston tried to recoup his losses through an insurance policy with the Maryland Insurance Company, but was denied on the grounds that the voyage had been …

That Elusive Consensus: The Historiographic Significance Of William E. Nelson's Works On Judicial Review, Mark Mcgarvie

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This essay provides a historiographical context for Nelson’s work on judicial review. It argues that Nelson’s integration of intellectual and legal history not only rebutted the instrumentalist historiography that prevailed when he undertook his work on Marshall and judicial review, but also fostered an appreciation of the need to place legal actors in the intellectual context in which they acted. Highlighting the influence of Bernard Bailyn’s pathfinding work on popular sovereignty upon Nelson’s development of his consensus theory, the essay contends that Nelson’s work changed the course of academic readings of Marshall’s jurisprudence to be consistent with a broader acceptance …

“Health Laws Of Every Description”: John Marshall’S Ruling On A Federal Health Care Law, David B. Kopel, Robert G. Natelson

David B Kopel

If John Marshall, the greatest of Chief Justices, were to hear a challenge to the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, how would he rule? Would the nationalist justice who, according to the New Deal Supreme Court, “described the Federal commerce power with a breadth never yet exceeded,” agree that federal control of health care was within that power?

In the fictional opinion below, Marshall rules on the constitutionality of a bill similar to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

We constructed this opinion chiefly from direct quotation and paraphrases of Marshall’s own words, …

The Treason Trial Of Aaron Burr, Douglas O. Linder

Faculty Works

The high-stakes treason trial of Aaron Burr came at an unstable time, both in Europe and in America. The American and French revolutions worried traditional European powers, Great Britain and Spain, who were determined to keep the radical new doctrine from undermining the power of their royalty. Meanwhile, Napoleon's empire-building produced sustained military conflict on the Continent. The United States seemed on the verge of a war with Spain, even as the Administration struggled to preserve neutrality. Americans west of the Alleghenies rejoiced in President Jefferson's acquisition of the Louisiana Territory, but boundary disputes and Spanish prohibitions on Louisiana residents' …

Marbury's Legacy Of Judicial Review After Two Centuries, Harry F. Tepker

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

John Marshall Through The Eyes Of An Admirer: John Quincy Adams, Michael Daly Hawkins

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

John Marshall, Mcculloch V. Maryland, And "We The People": Revisions In Need Of Revising, Martin S. Flaherty

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Judge For All Seasons, R. Kent Newmyer

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Alarming Aspects Of The Legacies Of Judicial Review And Of John Marshall, Stephen B. Presser

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

John Marshall: Remarks Of October 6, 2000, William H. Rehnquist

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Use That The Future Makes Of The Past: John Marshall's Greatness And Its Lessons For Today's Supreme Court Justices, Jack M. Balkin

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Lives Of John Marshall, Michael J. Gerhardt

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Chief Justice Marshall, Justice Holmes, And The Discourse Of Constitutional Adjudication, G. Edward White

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreword: On Jaffa, Lincoln, Marshall, And Original Intent, Lewis E. Lehrman

Seattle University Law Review

This Foreword introduces the article to follow written by Harry V. Jaffa, scholar of Abraham Lincoln’s political philosophy. The Foreward provides background material necessary to contextualize the ongoing debate surrounding constitutional interpretation emphasizing original intent addressed in Jaffa's article.

John Marshall's Contributions To American Neutrality Doctrines, Eric A. Belgrad

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

John Marshall's Preparation For The Bar -- Some Observations On His Law Notes, William F. Swindler

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

With John Marshall From William And Mary To Dartmouth College, Florian Bartosic

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

John Marshall In Perspective, Dudley Warner Woodbridge

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

John Marshall's Short Way With Statutes: A Study In The Judicial Use Of Legislation To Expound The Constitution, Wallace Mendelson

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Commentaries On The Constitution Of The United States : With A Preliminary Review Of The Constitutional History Of The Colonies And States Before The Adoption Of The Constitution, Joseph Story, Thomas M. Cooley

Books

From the Editor's Preface: “In preparing for the press a fourth edition of Mr. Justice Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, it has been thought proper to preserve the original text without alteration or interpolation, and to put in notes all discussions by the editor, as well as all references to subsequent adjudications, public papers, and events, tending to illustrate, support, or qualify the positions assumed in the text. The new amendments, however, seemed to demand treatment in the body of the work, and additional chapters are given for that purpose….”

Chief Justice Marshall, Lucian Minor

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.