Pol Lecture 11 Ch 9.doc

11 Pages
Unlock Document

Political Science
Cheryl Boudreau

22014Pol Lecture 11 Chapter 9 The Federal Judiciary Sage cqpresscomWord of the Day District of Columbia vs Hellersupreme court held that the Second Amendment protects an individuals right to keep and bear armshandguns are arms and therefore cannot be bannedbut can be subject to reasonable restrictionsSetting the Stage for Judicial ReviewAs the federalists prepared to leave office they passed the Judiciary Act of 1801sharply increased the number of district and appeals courtscreated new judgeships for Federalistsalso President Adams nominated and the Senate quickly confirmed outgoing secretary of state John Marshall as the new chief justiceSetting the StageAccording to Jefferson and his supporters the Federalists hadretired into the Judiciary as a strong hold and from that battery all the works for Republicanism are to be beaten down and erased by fraudulent use of the constitutionJeffersonwithdrew a number of appointment commissions that had yet to be delivered to the appointeesthreatened to repeal the Judiciary Act declined the judiciary as a hospital of decayed politicianscould congressabolish the courtsRemove lifetenured judgesWith repeal of the Judiciary Act imminent Federalists were encouraging John Marshall to rule the decision unconstitutionalthis assumed that the Court had the authority to make such a rulingin other words the authority or judicial review to rule acts of Congress unconstitutionalthis authority implicitly provided in Article III of the Constitutionon February 3 1802 by a 1615 vote the Senate voted to repeal the Judiciary Actthe House passed the bill as wellJefferson signed it into a lawalso suspended the Courts schedule for the next thirteen monthsthe Supreme Courttwo subsequent decisions Stuart v Lard Marbury v Madison Stuart v Lardon March 2 1803 the Court ruled congress did have the authority to recognize the judiciaryFederalist barricade dismantledbut marshal had not caved inMarbury v Madisonin a separate case decided a week earlier Marshall created the foundation of the courts powerMarbury and other Federalists who had been denied their justice of the peace commissions nearly two years before had appealed the the Court for redressasked the Court to issue a writ of mandamus a judicial instruction to a government officer to perform his dutytough case for Marshallsubjected bordered on trivialMarshall was deeply entangled in dispute his oversight as secretary of state caused the problem in the first placeand what if the Court decided in favor of Marbury and ordered Madison to deliver the commissions Likely they would be ignored not a good outcome for an already weak Courtif he ruled against Marbury he would appear to be bending the will of the DemocraticRepublicans and confirming the Courts subordinate positionin Marbury Marshall found a solution The ruling statedMadison should have delivered the commission but held that the section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that gave the Court the power to issue writs of mandamus exceeded the authority allotted the Court under the Constitutionable to chastise the Jeffersoniansyet not create a situation in which a court order would be floutedno affirmation of the Courts authority required by other political actorsonly required that the Court refuse to act on Marburys behalfone the surface appeared that Jefferson and his party had wonbut Marshall had opened the door to power for the Court in the form of judicial reviewThree Eras of the CourtTrends in Judicial activism coincide with three distinct issue eras in the Courts historynation versus state authoritygovernment regulation of the economycivil rights and libertiesNation versus Stateunresolved jurisdictional boundaries between the nation and state governmentheart of judiciarys most significant casesunder Marshall the Court favored national authority when it conflicted with states rightsMcCulloch v Maryland Marshall and his Court maintained that the national governments legitimacy was both independent of and superior to that of the individual statesthe necessary and proper clause of the Constitution gave Congress the right to charter a national bankthus states were in conflict with a legitimate activity of the federal government when they tried to tax the bank out of existenceShifts to the States Rights DoctrineMarshall died in 1935Andrew Jackson appointed Roger Taney as the next chief justiceadvocate of states rightsled the Court away from the national supremacy doctrineDred Scott v Sanford 1857Tanley held that federal laws outlawing slavery north of the MasonDixon line unconstitutionally infringed upon the settlers territorial rights to selfgovernment and private
More Less

Related notes for POL 1

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.