Papers on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court" and similar term paper topics

Paper #028455 :: John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court
Buy and instantly download this paper now

This paper evaluates John Marshall?s leadership of the Supreme Court by examining four landmark cases: "Marbury vs. Madison", "Fletcher vs. Peck", "Dartmouth vs. Woodward" and "McCulloch vs. Maryland". McCulloch v. Maryland

Written in 2002; 2,480 words; 5 sources; MLA; $ 75.95

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that John Marshall?s core philosophy was that individual rights were paramount and that the best agency to protect those rights is a strong central government. The author relates that "Marbury vs. Madison" defined the role of the Supreme Court; "Fletcher vs. Peck" answered the question of whether or not contracts made by a state are binding. The author continues that "Dartmouth College vs. Woodward" solved the question of what is the nature and identity of a corporation; "McCulloch vs. Maryland " delineates how far the federal government can go in its relationship with the sovereign states to uphold provisions of the federal constitution.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Marbury vs. Madison
Fletcher vs. Peck
Dartmouth vs. Woodward
McCulloch vs. Maryland
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"John Adams was defeated in his run for the presidency by Thomas Jefferson in 1800. In the waning days of his administration, Adams appointed sixteen justices of the peace for Washington, DC. These appointments were confirmed the same day by the lame duck federalist congress. The commissions were signed by Adams and delivered to the secretary of state (interestingly Marshall held this office) to be sealed and delivered. But not all of the commissions were delivered because of the pressures of time and a shortage of clerks. When Jefferson assumed office, he and his Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver the remaining commissions. One of the appointees, William Marbury, appealed to the Supreme Court to force Madison to deliver the undelivered commissions. The whole affair caused great political controversy. Jefferson and his followers resented the last minute appointments and saw them as a ploy by the outgoing Federalists to retain some influence and power. Marshall, a Federalist, privately stated that he believed that Marbury was entitled to his commission. Jefferson and Madison made it known that if the court ruled against them and issued a writ ordering Madison to deliver the commission, that they would ignore it. This concerned Marshall because he felt that this defiance would undermine the court. He had to find a way to resolve the situation by making his views about the case known without provoking defiance from Jefferson. In its opinion, written by Marshall, the court addressed three questions: 1.) was Marbury entitled to the commission? 2.) was he entitled to remedy? 3.) if so, was the Supreme Court the place to seek that remedy? The government argued that Marbury had no right to remedy. Marshall addressed the question of the legitimacy of the appointment first. He viewed the appointment to office as akin to individual property rights, which he defended throughout his career. Notwithstanding the fact that the appointments were made by an outgoing president and congress, Marshall affirmed that once a commission was signed and sealed, the appointee had a right to the office. Next, Marshall addressed Marbury?s right to remedy. He stated that the purpose of the court was not to decide political questions. Elected officials are accountable to the electorate for political decisions. The judiciary?s function is to address legal questions. In this case, the question was a legal one, since it involved an individual?s rights, which an elected official could not abrogate. Thus Marshall ruled that Marbury was entitled to remedy. The answer to the third question was the most important. Marshall noted that the Constitution spelled out the Supreme Court?s jurisdiction. This particular case was based on an expansion of that jurisdiction by Judiciary Act of 1789. Marshall stated that this law was unconstitutional. Congress could not alter the intent of the constitution by passing a law. In making this ruling, Marshall established the principle of judicial review. He claimed for the court, the power to review the laws of Congress and rule on their constitutionality."

Tags: state individual rights central corporation

More papers on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court"

1. Paper #066998 :: John Marshall ( 1,600 words; 10 sources; APA )
2. Paper #030097 :: John Marshall ( 2,719 words; 10 sources; MLA )
3. Paper #091444 :: The Supreme Court and Public Opinion ( 2,721 words; 5 sources; MLA )
4. Paper #000198 :: Federalism and the Supreme Court In the 1990s ( 2,000 words; 11 sources; )
5. Paper #018982 :: Interest Groups & Supreme Court ( 2,700 words; 10 sources; )

About AcaDemon

We have thousands of high-quality term papers, research papers, essays, book reports and dissertations on every topic. At AcaDemon, you can download those term papers to help you write yours! You can be sure that the term paper, essay, book report or research paper, you download are top-quality, competitively priced and high-level work.

Look for more research papers, essays and book reports on John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court

This Free Term Paper Abstract is a part of our Term Paper Library. Here you can purchase research papers, examples of essays, academic dissertations, articles, notes, analytical papers, book reports, stories and poems. We have thousands of persuasive, point-of-view, narrative, critical, compare and contrast and other types of essays in our Library. You can also find here Term papers on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Essays on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Research papers on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Student papers on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Book reports on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Dissertation on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Thesis on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Summary of paper on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court", Articles written on "John Marshall's Leadership of the Supreme Court".