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

Law Commons

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

John Marshall

Discipline
Institution
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 1 - 30 of 64

Full-Text Articles in Law

It Is A Constitution We Are Expounding: John Marshall, Spencer Roane, And The Fundamental Conflicts Surrounding Mcculloch V. Maryland (1819), Catherine T. Meisenheimer Nov 2023

It Is A Constitution We Are Expounding: John Marshall, Spencer Roane, And The Fundamental Conflicts Surrounding Mcculloch V. Maryland (1819), Catherine T. Meisenheimer

Compass: An Undergraduate Journal of American Political Ideas

Using a blend of primary and secondary sources, this research paper examines the lesser-known newspaper debate between Chief Justice John Marshall and Judge Spencer Roane of the Virginia Court of Appeals. The purpose of this research is to answer one question: What were the fundamental issues that divided early Americans as demonstrated by the landmark case of McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)? To contribute to the ongoing discussion of McCulloch and its significance, my paper attempts to understand the issues surrounding McCulloch within its broader, historical context. Instead of confining its importance to the Second Bank of the United States, I …


“Always Said To Be Of Indian Extraction”: Native/African American Freedom Suits In Virginia 1773-1853, Cress Ann Posten Sep 2023

“Always Said To Be Of Indian Extraction”: Native/African American Freedom Suits In Virginia 1773-1853, Cress Ann Posten

Doctoral Dissertations and Projects

Freedom suits of enslaved people in Virginia who claimed liberty based upon matrilineal descent from a Native American woman provide a multi-dimensional lens into social, cultural, and legal aspects of colonial and antebellum considerations of race, kinship, and self-determination. Within records of depositions are detailed transcriptions of questions posed to neighbors, family members, acquaintances of enslavers, and slaveowners themselves. Answers reveal a nuanced and complicated set of opinions concerning who had a right to freedom. Local memory banks overflowed with detailed descriptions of the plaintiff and his or her native ancestress, including skin color, hair texture, and manners. Within isolated …


Playing With Words: Amar’S Nationalist Constitution, Robert J. Pushaw Jr. Sep 2022

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 Sep 2020

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 Aug 2020

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.


Review Of Joel Richard Paul, Without Precedent: Chief Justice John Marshall And His Times, Pat Newcombe Jan 2019

Review Of Joel Richard Paul, Without Precedent: Chief Justice John Marshall And His Times, Pat Newcombe

Faculty Scholarship

This Article reviews Joel Richard Paul's book, Without Precedent: Chief Justice John Marshall and His Times. The Author found this scholarly work to be very readable. Paul relies on ample and deep primary sources, yet manages to present John Marshall in a very human and accessible way. This narrative would be an excellent selection for any academic or public library, especially those that collect in the American history area, and it is highly recommended.


Mcculloch V. Marbury, Kermit Roosevelt Iii, Heath Khan Jan 2019

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 Nov 2016

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 …


United States Obligations Under Status Of Forces Agreements: A New Method Of Extradition?, William J. Norton Jul 2016

United States Obligations Under Status Of Forces Agreements: A New Method Of Extradition?, William J. Norton

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.


Glimpses Of Marshall In The Military, Kevin C. Walsh May 2016

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. …


The Fourth Chief Justice Of The United States, John Marshall, Meagan Schantz Jan 2016

The Fourth Chief Justice Of The United States, John Marshall, Meagan Schantz

Writing Across the Curriculum

The fourth Chief Justice of the United States, John Marshall (1755-1835), served thirty-four years (1801-1835) in the United States Supreme Court. During his term, Marshall established a stable foundation for the United States Judiciary, which in turn increased the role and scope of the federal government. Marshall’s life and achievements are documented in the biography, The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law by Charles F. Hobson, the editor of The Papers of John Marshall.




Comment Le Droit Des Gens Cessa D’Être Un Droit Politique: Le Droit International De John Marshall, Elisabeth Zoller Jan 2015

Comment Le Droit Des Gens Cessa D’Être Un Droit Politique: Le Droit International De John Marshall, Elisabeth Zoller

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Livingston & Gilchrist V. The Maryland Insurance Co. (1813): A Testament To Judicial Flexibility, Kathleen Lord Fallon Dec 2014

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 Jun 2014

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 …


National Federation Of Independent Business V. Sebelius, Brannon P. Denning, Glenn H. Reynolds Jan 2013

National Federation Of Independent Business V. Sebelius, Brannon P. Denning, Glenn H. Reynolds

Brannon P. Denning

Using our now-famous "Five Takes" format, Glenn Reynolds and I analyze NFIB v. Sebelius from five different perspectives: (1) Sebelius as Marbury; (2) Sebelius as Bakke; (3) Sebelius and the "legitimating" power of judicial review; (4) Sebelius as a Thayerian decision; and (5) Sebelius as part of some long game of Chief Justice Roberts'.


Federalist Or Friends Of Adams: The Marshall Court And Party Politics, Mark A. Graber Apr 2012

Federalist Or Friends Of Adams: The Marshall Court And Party Politics, Mark A. Graber

Mark Graber

No abstract provided.


Territory, Wilderness, Property, And Reservation: Land And Religion In Native American Supreme Court Cases, Kathleen Sands Jan 2012

Territory, Wilderness, Property, And Reservation: Land And Religion In Native American Supreme Court Cases, Kathleen Sands

American Indian Law Review

In two trilogies of Supreme Court Decisions, both involving Native Americans, land is a key metaphor, figuring variously as property, territory, wilderness, and reservation. The first trilogy, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, comprises Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832). The second trilogy concerns Native American claims for religious freedom under the First Amendment and includes Bowen v. Roy (1986), Lyng v. Northwest Cemetery Protective Association (1988), and Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith (1990). The Marshal cases attempted to legitimate the transformation of land from wilderness to territory and property, and …


“Health Laws Of Every Description”: John Marshall’S Ruling On A Federal Health Care Law, David B. Kopel, Robert G. Natelson Jun 2011

“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, …


Originalism, John Marshall, And The Necessary And Proper Clause: Resurrecting The Jurisprudence Of Alexander Addison, Patrick J. Charles Jan 2010

Originalism, John Marshall, And The Necessary And Proper Clause: Resurrecting The Jurisprudence Of Alexander Addison, Patrick J. Charles

Cleveland State Law Review

However, to give Marshall full credit for the “choice of means” doctrine is unfair, he was not the first to lay claim to the doctrine when interpreting the Necessary and Proper Clause. Indeed, the philosophical and legal influences of John Marshall have been the speculation of scholarly discourse for some time. For instance, many legal commentators and historians have attributed the influence of Marshall's opinions to being a strong Federalist because many of his opinions echo the Federalist interpretation of the Constitution. However, Marshall's opinions were also influenced by factors that sometimes conflicted with Federalist thought. This Article does not …


The Stories We Tell, And Have Told, About Tribal Sovereignty: Legal Fictions At Their Most Pernicious, Hope M. Babcock Jan 2010

The Stories We Tell, And Have Told, About Tribal Sovereignty: Legal Fictions At Their Most Pernicious, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Starting with Chief Justice John Marshall and continuing through to the present Supreme Court, the story of Indian sovereignty has been consistent—it exists only in the most diminished form. Some reasons for this have been premised on the incapacity of Indians to self-govern; others on theories of federalism; while still others on the ambitions of non-Indians. However, the factual premises behind the concept of diminished sovereignty are baseless—legal fictions about the conquest of Indians and their nature. These fictions originated in Chief Justice Marshall’s Indian Law Trilogy and should have vanished long ago when their original purposes were fulfilled, like …


John Marshall: Definer Of A Nation, Denise R. Johnson Oct 2009

John Marshall: Definer Of A Nation, Denise R. Johnson

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.


Taking Care Of John Marshall’S Political Ghost, Michael P. Van Alstine Jan 2008

Taking Care Of John Marshall’S Political Ghost, Michael P. Van Alstine

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.


The Original Meaning Of An Omission: The Tenth Amendment, Popular Sovereignty And “Expressly” Delegated Power, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2008

The Original Meaning Of An Omission: The Tenth Amendment, Popular Sovereignty And “Expressly” Delegated Power, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

Today, courts and commentators generally agree that early efforts to strictly limit the federal government to only expressly enumerated powers were decisively rebuffed by Chief Justice John Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland. According to Marshall, the fact that the framers departed from the language of the Articles of Confederation and omitted the term expressly suggested that they intended Congress to have a broad array of implied as well as expressly delegated powers. As Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story later wrote, any attempt to read the Tenth Amendment as calling for a strict construction of federal power was simply an attempt …


Minority Report: John Marshall And The Defense Of The Alien And Sedition Acts, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2007

Minority Report: John Marshall And The Defense Of The Alien And Sedition Acts, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

In 1799, the Federalist minority of the Virginia House of Delegates produced an extended defense of the Alien and Sedition Acts. This Minority Report responded to Madison's famous Virginia Resolutions and efforts by Virginia Republicans to tar the Adams Administration with having exceeded its powers under the federal Constitution. Originally attributed to John Marshall by biographer Albert Beveridge, recent biographies of Marshall have omitted the episode or rejected Beveridge's claim. The current editors of the Papers of John Marshall omitted the Minority Report from their multi-volume collection of Marshall's work and have successfully lobbied editors of similar collections to remove …


The Treason Trial Of Aaron Burr, Douglas O. Linder Jan 2007

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' …


Tucker’S Rule: St. George Tucker And The Limited Construction Of Federal Power, Kurt T. Lash Jan 2006

Tucker’S Rule: St. George Tucker And The Limited Construction Of Federal Power, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

When Joseph Story published his Commentaries on the Constitution in 1833, he dedicated the work "To the Honorable John Marshall," whose "expositions of constitutional law enjoy a rare and extraordinary authority. They constitute a monument of fame far beyond the ordinary memorials of political and military glory." Throughout the Commentaries, Story generously quoted Chief Justice Marshall's great nationalist opinions in McCulloch v. Maryland, Gibbons v. Ogden, and Cohens v. Virginia and used them to construct a thoroughly nationalist reading of the federal Constitution. Along the way, Story seemingly dismantled prior states' rights interpretations of federal power, particularly St. George Tucker's …


Marbury's Legacy Of Judicial Review After Two Centuries, Harry F. Tepker Jan 2004

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 Mar 2002

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

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Lives Of John Marshall, Michael J. Gerhardt Mar 2002

The Lives Of John Marshall, Michael J. Gerhardt

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.


John Marshall, Mcculloch V. Maryland, And "We The People": Revisions In Need Of Revising, Martin S. Flaherty Mar 2002

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

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.