Marshall Court

The Definition of the Marshall Court

The Marshall Court refers to the tenure of John Marshall as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835 and the impact his role had on American history. The Marshall Court's rulings in several key cases had a tremendous effect on the scope and authority of the judicial branch.

Fig. 1 - Portrait of Chief Justice John Marshall by Henry Inman, 1832

Federalists vs Democratic-Republicans

The first American political parties were established in the 1790s during the presidencies of George Washington and John Adams. They were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans.

Federalists supported a strong, centralized government. They saw the future of the United States as a powerful, industrialized nation. Federalists preferred that the Constitution be interpreted broadly, allowing the federal government to assume powers deemed necessary for the successful advancement of the nation. Early American Federalists included George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, and John Marshall.

Democratic-Republicans favored leaving power in the hands of the states. They envisioned the United States as a nation that would prosper as an agricultural powerhouse. They preferred that the Constitution be interpreted in a narrow way, allowing only what is specifically mentioned to be regarded as law. Democratic-Republican party members included Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and John Quincy Adams.

The 1800 Presidential Election

The presidential election of 1800 marked the first presidential party change in American history. Outgoing Federalist, John Adams, would be replaced by Democratic-Republican President Thomas Jefferson.

At this time, the Democratic-Republican Party dominated the executive and legislative branches while the Federalists controlled the judicial branch. The tension between the interests of these two parties at the beginning of the 19th century was the backdrop to many of the decisions of the Marshall Court.

With the shift in political parties, concern arose for the fate of the judiciary. It had previously been the weakest branch of government. Federalists had recently reduced the Supreme Court from 6 to 5 justices and created new circuit courts. Before Jefferson’s swearing-in, John Adams nominated 42 justices of the peace to serve in the Federal Courts. Because this transpired at the very end of Adam's presidency, the appointees were referred to as “midnight judges.” This upset the Democratic-Republicans who rightly perceived Adam’s appointments as a last-minute Federalist power grab.

Marshall Court Rulings

Fig. 2 - Marbury v. Madison quote, John Marshall, Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-2.0

The Marshall Court Case of Marbury v. Madison

The 1803 Marshall Court case of Marbury v. Madison emerged from the dispute between outgoing Federalists and incoming Democratic-Republicans over Adam’s midnight appointments. After President Jefferson was sworn in, he learned what Adams had done. In response, Jefferson told his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to distribute the judgeships. One of the prospective justices who didn’t receive his appointment was William Marbury.

When Marbury learned that the letter confirming his appointment hadn’t been delivered, he sued Madison. Marbury cited the Judiciary Act of 1789 in his claim, which established how the federal courts should function in the United States.

John Marshall surprised everyone when he ruled against Marbury. Marshall could not require Madison to deliver the appointment to Marbury. Instead, he led the court in making a judgment against Marbury on the grounds that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional.

Before this, there was no established authority on who could judge the validity of federal laws. Marshall increased the Supreme Court’s power tremendously by designating it as the institution that would have the final say when it came to judicial review, or the power to determine whether or not a law is constitutional. The “weakest branch” had been empowered to determine the constitutionality of decisions made by the executive and legislative branches.

Gibbons v. Ogden

This Gibbons v. Ogden dispute of 1824 was another important case within the Marshall Court. The case came out of a conflict between New York and New Jersey concerning who could control trade on the Hudson River. The Marshall Court ruled that the states' attempts to control trade were unconstitutional. The Gibbons v. Ogden decision cemented the federal government authority over interstate commerce. Again, federal law takes priority over state law.

Impact of the Marshall Court

The rulings of the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall secured the role of the judiciary as the branch of government that would interpret the constitution as well as support federal authority over state rights.

Figure 3, Supreme Court building, Washington, D.C., Pixabay.

The issue of federal power versus state authority is revisited throughout American history. One example occurred with the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision which rendered racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. Several states defied the ruling and would not integrate their schools. Another example involves same-sex marriage in which state and federal laws have come into conflict several times.

Due to the increase in the authority of the Supreme Court, enormous power is granted to Supreme Court Justices. Justices have a major role in deciding cases that can fundamentally impact the future of the United States. Because the president nominates Justices to the Supreme Court, they also carry an immense amount of power.

The Significance of the Marshall Court

The power and reach of the Supreme Court grew under the leadership of John Marshall. Marshall is quite possibly the most important Supreme Court Justice of all time. He established the judicial review of laws and set the precedent that federal law could trump the states.