Chapter 14 The Development of the Judiciary. Judicial Review Right of federal courts to declare laws of Congress and acts of the executive branch unconstitutional.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
McCulloch v Maryland (1819)
Advertisements

Strengthening the Judicial Branch SOL: VUS.5e.  Born in Midland, Virginia  Veteran of the Revolutionary War.  He endured the harsh winter at.
The Marshall Court Mr. Johnson AP US History.
John Marshall and the United States Supreme Court
Jeffersonian Republicans Strongly supported Jeffersonian Republicans Strongly supported Commerce Commerce Industry Industry State’s rights State’s rights.
Marbury v. Madison (Appointed fed. Judge by Pres. Adams night before Adams left office) (Sec. of State for Jefferson) (1803) Background –“Midnight Judge”
What is Federalism? Federalism is where government power is divided and shared between the national government and the states.
John Marshall, Chief Justice
FEDERALISM Results of the Constitutional Convention.
WHY WAS OUR GOVERNMENT DESIGNED NOT TO WORK VERY WELL? What choices do democratic founders have to make? Efficiency vs. liberty vs. responsiveness vs.
Marbury v. Madison (1803) Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) McCulloch v. Maryland (1824)
1 Chapter 3 Federalism. 2 Federalism governments Federalism = dividing power between two separate governments 40 % of people live in federalist counties.
Judicial Branch Notes Denise Bell. Power of the Supreme Court Originally the court was paid little attention. During the first 10 years the court had.
The Supreme Court (The Judicial Branch) What’s the big deal?
JOHN MARSHALL’S GREATEST HITS Marbury v. Madison1803 Fletcher v. Peck1810 McCulloch v. Maryland1819 Gibbons v. Ogden1824.
The Marshall Court Chapter 8. John Marshall and Judicial Nationalism Marshall was the most important chief justice in U.S. history ( ) Significantly.
The Supreme Court.
Introduction to Federal Courts. Categories of law Statutory law – Written, codified law; statutes Common law – Accumulation of court precedents Criminal.
John Marshall, Chief Justice  Nominated to Supreme Court by John Adams in1801  Marshall agreed, and upheld Hamilton’s doctrine of “implied powers” 
The Evolution and Development of Federalism The allocation of powers in our federal system has changed dramatically over the years.
By: Mireina Barrios. Dred Scott and Roger B. Taney Dred Scott, a slave who had his freedom at Illinois and the free territory of Wisconsin before moving.
Marshall Court I.Chief Justice John Marshall A. Dominates Supreme Court B. Strengthened federal govt. at the expense of state governments.
Supreme Court Cases Overview. Marbury v. Madison Marbury sued Sec of State Madison for his appointment to be a judge (midnight judges – Adams administration)
AHSGE Supreme Court Cases. Brown v. Board of Education Ends segregation Overturns Plessy v. Ferguson.
LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES Elizabeth Benavides Mariya Gershkovich.
May 1  Objectives:  To refamiliarize yourself with the major courts and court cases in American History  Homework:  Study  Agenda:  Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Cases Setting the Precedent. John Marshall Helped make the Supreme Court the powerful institution it is today Presided over several important.
1. Supreme Court Cases Pt. 1.   SWBAT evaluate the ways the the Supreme Court has dealt with many controversial issues and analyze their impact on American.
NATIONALISM & THE MARSHALL COURT Mr. Sandford AP United States History.
Unit 4: GROWTH OF THE YOUNG NATION Topic 3: The Marshall Court (Judicial Nationalism)
The Marshall Courts. Purpose of the Judicial Branch  Interpret the Law –Set Legal Precedents –Determine if laws passed by Congress or Presidential Actions.
UNIT II – CONSTITUTION AND RIGHTS OUR LIVING CONSTITUTION.
Supreme Court of the United States  SCOTUS Branch of gov’t which interprets/applies the law Makes sure laws/gov’t action are constitutional  Judicial.
UNITED STATES HISTORY AND THE CONSTITUTION
Supreme Court USHC-1.7.
Our Living Constitution
Unit 4: GROWTH OF THE YOUNG NATION
Supreme Court USHC-1.7.
The Supreme Court Chapter 8 section 3
The History of the Federal Judiciary
The Judicial Branch.
NATIONALISM & THE MARSHALL COURT
Chapter 3 FEDERALISM.
The Judicial Branch.
VUS5e John Marshall How did Chief Justice John Marshall, a Virginian, contribute to the growth of the U.S. Supreme Court’s importance in relation to the.
McCulloch v Maryland (1819)
John Marshall and the United States Supreme Court
Expanding the powers of the Judicial Branch
The Marshall Court.
APUSH Review: Supreme Court Cases In The New Curriculum
Supreme Court Cases.
10 Court Cases in American History
Unit 4: GROWTH OF THE YOUNG NATION
NATIONALISM & THE MARSHALL COURT
Why was the case “Marbury vs. Madison” significant?
Growth of the Supreme Court
The Federalists in Power and the Emergence of a Two-Party System
John Marshall Court US History.
Defining the Powers of the National Government
Chapter 3 Federalism.
Marbury v. Madison Issue: Marbury sued over a judgeship promised him by an outgoing president. Ruling: Established the principal of Judicial Review; strengthening.
Supreme Court Cases of the early Republic
The Judicial Branch Article 3.
April 27, 2015.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases
The Judicial Branch.
Day #5 Supreme Court Cases
Aim: What are the roles and responsibilities of the Judicial Branch?
The Marshall Court.
Presentation transcript:

Chapter 14 The Development of the Judiciary

Judicial Review Right of federal courts to declare laws of Congress and acts of the executive branch unconstitutional Right of federal courts to declare laws of Congress and acts of the executive branch unconstitutional The Court has declared over 160 federal laws unconstitutional The Court has declared over 160 federal laws unconstitutional Comparative Comparative No high court in Britain—Parliament is supreme No high court in Britain—Parliament is supreme Australia, Canada, & India have similar courts Australia, Canada, & India have similar courts

Two Views of the Court Strict-constructionist Strict-constructionist Loose-constructionist (activist) Loose-constructionist (activist) This does not necessarily coincide with liberals and conservatives!! This does not necessarily coincide with liberals and conservatives!!

The Court According to Our Founding Fathers Did not see the Court as a means of public policy Did not see the Court as a means of public policy Role was to solve disputes between people— contracts Role was to solve disputes between people— contracts Judges would apply existing laws as precedents Judges would apply existing laws as precedents Federalist 78 Federalist 78 Judiciary is “least dangerous” to political rights Judiciary is “least dangerous” to political rights “liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone” “liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone”

3 Historical Phases of the Court Legitimacy of federal government v. state government Legitimacy of federal government v. state government Relationship between government and economy Relationship between government and economy present Personal liberties and social equality Personal liberties and social equality

Phase 1: National Supremacy

Chief Justice John Marshall Lays the Foundation Marbury v. Madison (1803) Marbury v. Madison (1803) Judicial review Judicial review “necessary and proper” upheld “necessary and proper” upheld McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) State may not tax an enterprise (bank) created by federal government State may not tax an enterprise (bank) created by federal government “supremacy clause” upheld “supremacy clause” upheld

Supremacy of Federal Government Upheld Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) commerce clause of the Constitution grants the federal government the power to determine how interstate commerce is conducted commerce clause of the Constitution grants the federal government the power to determine how interstate commerce is conducted No monopoly could be given for steamboat travel on a river that was between 2 states No monopoly could be given for steamboat travel on a river that was between 2 states

But the Decisions Were Not Necessarily Enforced… Jeffersonian Republicans Jeffersonian Republicans Jacksonian Democrats Jacksonian Democrats Worcester v. Georgia (1832) Worcester v. Georgia (1832) Cherokees do not have to move Cherokees do not have to move Trail of Tears Trail of Tears

A Move Towards States Rights Marshall replaced by Roger B. Taney Marshall replaced by Roger B. Taney Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Slaves not citizens therefore they cannot sue in court Slaves not citizens therefore they cannot sue in court

Phase 2: Government & the Economy

When Should the Economy be Regulated by the States or the Nation? These years showed a strong attachment of the Court to private property These years showed a strong attachment of the Court to private property 14 th Amendment seen as also protecting private property 14 th Amendment seen as also protecting private property No state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” No state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” This is what turns the Court onto a course of judicial activism! This is what turns the Court onto a course of judicial activism!

Cases Limiting Regulation Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust (1895) Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust (1895) Unconstitutional to impose federal tax on income from interest earned from stocks & from banks Unconstitutional to impose federal tax on income from interest earned from stocks & from banks Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) Production is not commerce Production is not commerce “the powers not expressly delegated to the national government are reserved" to the states and to the people “the powers not expressly delegated to the national government are reserved" to the states and to the people Actually prevented limitation of child labor Actually prevented limitation of child labor

Cases Authorizing Regulation Munn v. Illinois (1877) Munn v. Illinois (1877) states may regulate the use of private property "when such regulation becomes necessary for the public good” states may regulate the use of private property "when such regulation becomes necessary for the public good” Mugler v. Kansas (1887) Mugler v. Kansas (1887) State prohibition does not infringe on Fourteenth Amendment rights State prohibition does not infringe on Fourteenth Amendment rights Reserved powers from Hammer v. Dagenhart Reserved powers from Hammer v. Dagenhart

Cases Authorizing Regulation Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Separate but equal facilities are constitutional Separate but equal facilities are constitutional Not in violation of 14 th Amendment—no one has been violated of life, liberty, or property Not in violation of 14 th Amendment—no one has been violated of life, liberty, or property Segregation does not equal inferiority Segregation does not equal inferiority From 1887 to 1910 the Court upheld state regulations 80% of the time! From 1887 to 1910 the Court upheld state regulations 80% of the time!

Phase 3: Personal Liberties and Social Equality

The Focus Changes Stayed clear of regulation Stayed clear of regulation Moved to support of free speech Moved to support of free speech Began when FDR attempted to “pack” the Court Began when FDR attempted to “pack” the Court Has become extremely activist since the arrival of Chief Justice Earl Warren in 1953 Has become extremely activist since the arrival of Chief Justice Earl Warren in 1953 Federal government increasingly able to regulate anything from economy to liberties Federal government increasingly able to regulate anything from economy to liberties

Since 1992 The Court has backed away from so much regulation The Court has backed away from so much regulation Restoration of states rights Restoration of states rights United States v. Lopez (1995) United States v. Lopez (1995) possession of a gun in a local school zone is not an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have a substantial effect on interstate commerce possession of a gun in a local school zone is not an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have a substantial effect on interstate commerce the law is a criminal statute that has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic activity the law is a criminal statute that has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic activity