Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Legal History Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Legal History

Judging In The Days Of The Early Republic: A Critique Of Judge Richard Arnold's Use Of History In Anastasoff V. United States, R. Ben Brown Apr 2001

Judging In The Days Of The Early Republic: A Critique Of Judge Richard Arnold's Use Of History In Anastasoff V. United States, R. Ben Brown

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Judge Arnold writes in his opinion that courts have the power to interpret or find the law but not create it. He argues that this practice was well established during colonial times and that it was adopted at the nation’s creation. The source of law during the formation of the United States is not as clear as Judge Arnold claims. Courts applied their roles differently in each jurisdiction. The complex history of the appropriate role of the judiciary contradicts Judge Arnold’s claim.


The Marbury Mystery: Why Did William Marbury Sue In The Supreme Court?, Susan Low Bloch Jan 2001

The Marbury Mystery: Why Did William Marbury Sue In The Supreme Court?, Susan Low Bloch

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 1801, when William Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering Secretary of State James Madison to deliver his commission as justice of the peace, he initiated one of the most important cases in the Court's history. But why did Marbury choose the Supreme Court? Was there a lower federal court that could have granted the writ at the time? The short answer is "yes." Rather than making an unsuccessful attempt to invoke the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court, I have learned that he could have brought his suit in the then …