156k views
2 votes
Prompt

Choose TWO important Supreme Court cases decided by the Marshall Court. For each one, describe the historical
circumstances surrounding the case, explain the Supreme Court's decision, and discuss the impact of the court's decision on
the balance of power in govemment.
.
Marbury v. Madison
McCulloch v. Maryland
Dartmouth College v. Woodward
Gibbons v. Ogden

Prompt Choose TWO important Supreme Court cases decided by the Marshall Court. For-example-1
User YUdoDis
by
4.8k points

2 Answers

2 votes

Final answer:

During Chief Justice Marshall's time on the Supreme Court, he played a crucial role in establishing the Court's authority and its impact on government.

Step-by-step explanation:

During Chief Justice Marshall's time on the Supreme Court, he played a crucial role in establishing the Court's authority and its impact on government.

One of the most significant cases decided by the Marshall Court was Marbury v. Madison in 1803. This case arose from a dispute between outgoing President John Adams and incoming President Thomas Jefferson. The case revolved around the appointment of William Marbury as a justice of the peace by Adams, which was not delivered in time by then-Secretary of State James Madison. The central issue was whether the Supreme Court had the power to compel the executive branch to deliver the appointment and whether it had the authority to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional.

As for the question of whether justices should take political factors into account when ruling on the law, it is a complex issue. Justices are expected to base their decisions on the Constitution and legal precedent, not on personal or political biases.

However, it is inevitable that some political considerations may influence their rulings to some extent. It is crucial for justices to remain impartial and apply the law objectively, but it is unrealistic to expect them to be entirely free from any political influence. Striking a balance between staying true to the law and considering the broader implications of their decisions is a challenge that justices must navigate.

User Ankur Garg
by
4.8k points
3 votes

Answer:

Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams within the 1800 presidential election. Before President Jefferson took workplace on March four, 1801, Adams and Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, that created new courts, added judges, and gave the president additional management over the appointment of judges. The Act was basically an endeavor by Adams and his party to frustrate his successor, as he used the act to appoint sixteen new circuit judges and forty two new justices of the peace. The appointees were approved by the Senate, however they might not be valid till their commissions were delivered by the Secretary of State.

William Marbury had been appointed Justice of the Peace within the District of Columbia, however his commission wasn't delivered. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to compel the new Secretary of State, James Madison, to deliver the documents. Marbury, joined by 3 different equally settled appointees, petitioned for a judicial writ of writ compelling the delivery of the commissions.

The Court found that Madison’s refusal to deliver the commission was outlawed, however didn't order Madison at hand over Marbury’s commission via a judicial writ of writ. Instead, the Court control that the supply of the Judiciary Act of 1789 sanctionative Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional since it speculated to extend the Court’s original jurisdiction on the far side that that Article III, Section 2, established.

Marshall expanded that a judicial writ of writ was the right thanks to obtain a remedy, however all over the Court couldn't issue it. Marshall reasoned that the Judiciary Act of 1789 conflicted with the Constitution. Congress didn't have the facility to switch the Constitution through regular legislation as a result of the ascendancy Clause places the Constitution before the laws.

In thus holding, Marshall established the principle of review, i.e., the facility to declare a law unconstitutional.

In 1816, the New Hampshire council endeavored to change Dartmouth College- - a secretly supported organization - into a state college. The council changed the school's corporate contract by moving the control of trustee arrangements to the lead representative. While trying to recapture authority over the assets of Dartmouth College, the old trustees recorded suit against William H. Woodward, who favored the new representatives.

The Contract Clause (Art 1, Section 10, Clause 1) disallows states from disregarding contracts with private or public companies. In a 5-to-1 choice, the Court inferred that the Contract Clause applies to private just as open enterprises. The Court held that the College's corporate sanction qualified as an agreement between private gatherings, with which the assembly couldn't meddle. The way that the public authority had dispatched the sanction didn't change the school into a common establishment. Boss Justice Marshall's assessment underscored that the expression "contract" alluded to exchanges including singular property rights, not to "the political relations between the public authority and its residents."

Step-by-step explanation:

Edge 2021

User Anurag Arwalkar
by
4.7k points