1. The Marshall Court
Mr. Johnson
AP US History

4. Yazoo Land Grants

6. The Marshall Court
Mr. Johnson
AP US History

7. Who Was John Marshall?

8. Three Branches

9. Who Interprets the Constitution?
John Marshall
Judicial review
Thomas Jefferson
Nullification by states

10. John Marshall Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from 1801-1835
Federalist
National supremacy
Economic growth
Independence and power of judicial branch

11. “Midnight Judge” William Marbury
Marbury v. Madison, 1803
Issue
Judicial review
Partisan politics
Background
“Lame duck” Federalist Congressmen passed a new Judiciary Act in early 1801
Adams (F) appointed “midnight judges” but Jefferson (DR) refused to deliver commissions
Marbury sued for his job
Outcome
S.C. established its power of judicial review over president and Congress
Marbury didn’t get the job
This case was the most important precedent (stare decisis = let the decision stand)
“Midnight Judge” William Marbury
Secretary of State
James Madison

12. Cohens v. Virginia, 1821 Issue Background Outcome
Federal jurisdiction over the states
Background
The Cohens were convicted in Virginia for selling illegal lottery tickets
The Cohens appealed the state convictions through the federal courts
Outcome
Supreme Court asserted its power to review state court decisions

13. Fletcher v. Peck, 1810 Issue Background Outcome Contract law
Corrupt Georgia legislature granted land to speculators in exchange for bribes (“Yazoo Land Scandal”)
After election, new Georgia legislature canceled the deal
Outcome
S.C. upheld land grants
Sanctity of contracts (no matter how they were formed)
Victory of “wealth and privilege” over “mob” wanting wealth redistribution
Yazoo Land Grants

14. Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 1819
Issue
Contract law
Background
Dartmouth was created by a royal charter from King George III
New Hampshire tried to place college under state control
Outcome
S.C. ruled that the college charter stands
Sanctity of contracts
Laissez-faire (government shouldn’t interfere with private enterprise)

15. McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819 Issue Background Decision
National supremacy
Interstate commerce
National bank
Background
Maryland hated the national bank, so it imposed a tax on the bank’s branch in Maryland
Decision
National bank is constitutional under the “necessary & proper” (elastic) clause
“The power to tax is the power to destroy”… therefore Maryland cannot be given the power to tax the national government
Established national supremacy over the states

16. Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824 Issue Background Decision Interstate commerce
Gibbons and Ogden ran competing steamboat companies that ferried goods from state to state
Ogden, who had the exclusive NJ state monopoly license, sued in order to shut down Gibbons, who had a federal license
Decision
Only the federal government (not states) may regulate interstate commerce
National supremacy over the states
Gibbons (federal license) won

17. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 1831
Issue
Native American sovereignty
Background
U.S. constitution failed to clearly define relationship between tribal governments and federal government
Decision
S.C. ruled that tribes are “domestic dependent nations” with some rights but not complete sovereignty
Cherokee Chief
John Ross

18. Indian Removal on the Trail of Tears
Worchester v. Georgia, 1832
Issue
Native American sovereignty
Background
Georgia passed Indian Removal Act to displace Cherokees and other tribes
Cherokees sued, arguing that Georgia had no jurisdiction
Decision
S.C. ruled in favor of Cherokees…
…but President Andrew Jackson ignored the court’s decision: “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”
Indians were removed along the “Trail of Tears” to Oklahoma reservations
Indian Removal on the Trail of Tears

19. Review: Main Ideas National supremacy Economic growth
Independence and power of judicial branch
Key Cases
Marbury v. Madison: judicial review
McCulloch v. Maryland: national supremacy, national bank
Gibbons v. Ogden: national supremacy, interstate commerce

20. historywithmrjohnson.weebly.com

21. Charles R. Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 1837
Issue
Contract law
Background
Charles River Bridge Co. believed that its contract gave it monopoly rights
Charles River Bridge sued to stop construction of competing, nearby Warren Bridge
Outcome
Monopoly contract fails
Reversal of previous contract decisions allowed for more competition
(note: Taney, not Marshall, Court decision)
Old Charles River Bridge
New Warren Bridge