• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Chief Justice Marshall

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The article "Chief Justice Marshall Takes the Law in Hand", by Wernick discusses how Marshall and Jefferson, mainly Marshall " took separate and independent actions ensuring that a nation, one and indivisible, would eventually result". This article simply clarifies the truth to us about what kind of nation was brought up by two men who detested each other. This article brings us back to the early 1800's where the first sight of nationhood came into the hands of these two different men. In February of 1803, the Supreme Court declared for the first time a law unconstitutional that had been passed by congress and passed by the President. This was the decision given in the case called Marbury vs. Madison. After this famous case Jefferson went over what were pretty much the Presidents power by buying Louisiana from Bonaparte for $15 million. Marshall remains as "austere and shadowy figure" (Wernick, 114) who is remembered pretty much only for writing many brilliant decisive decisions. Two books about Marshall bring him to life as a talented and appealing figure. Jefferson and Marshall were second cousins once removed but their opinions were completely different. Jefferson was a slaveholding aristocrat born to wealth and Marshall was simply a self-made man. Jefferson was ambassador to France and Marshall played a big role in ratifying the constitution. ...read more.

Middle

(Wernick, 116) Jefferson knew the fact that the President could make treaties could be stretched out enough to say it was legal to ass 828,000 square miles of territory. If this was true than other phrases in Constitution could be made to mean many things. After this the Jefferson and Congress put this issue away. After the war of 1812 Congress had voted to spend federal money in internal improvements, which included building roads and digging canals. Madison vetoed the bill and said, "The power to regulate commerce among several states, cannot include a power to construct roads and canals, and to improve the navigation of water-courses in order to facilitate, improve, and secure such a commerce.... To refer the power in question to the clause 'to provide for the common defense and general welfare' would be contrary to the established and consistent rules of interpretation." (Wernick, 117) Case after case Marshall kept cutting away at the theory of state rights. Jefferson had nothing else to do now except look as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who was appointed for life did his job. Marshall and his court gained "Judicial Prestige" because they established the judicial branch of the government as the umpire of disputes between the conflicting powers of the state and federal governments. ...read more.

Conclusion

This article fits greatly into its time period. This article helps learn how two men that were completely opposites in opinion came up to form such a great nation. This article helps me learn about many cases that were judged by probably the most important Chief Justice who ever served. These cases were important to the United States being that it shaped our nation greatly. This article gives background information that is more detailed and tells us really what happened back in time. This article has no historiographical debate because everything Wernick uses is fact. Wernick tells us how Marshall rules his cases in favor of the Federal Government and never is there an argument. All he gives us is facts about the cases and also the life of Marshall and Jefferson. In Conclusion, Marshall and Jefferson where two men who were completely different but yet shaped this nation greatly. Marshall took the law pretty much into his own hands once he was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Jefferson would get mad about what Marshall did for the fact that they had different opinions and believed in different things. In pretty much all of Marshall's decisions he favored the Federal Government. Those cases in favor for the Federal Government include Fletcher vs. Peck, McCulloch vs. Maryland and many more. These two men will always be a part of history and especially because even though they didn't work together they accomplished many great things that helped and keep helping the nation today. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate History section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate History essays

  1. American Anti-Imperialism vs. Imperialism

    Specifically, the U.S. and other world leaders believed an imperialist policy would have several effects. An imperialist policy would bring the economy out of immediate financial crisis- a severe depression struck the US in 1893. It would help create conditions that would allow for future investments.

  2. The Congress of Vienna, 1814-1815

    He was inconsistent and too much of an idealist. At one moment, he was a champion of liberalism but at the next, an ambitious imperialist b. Alexander I looked forward to territorial gains and he had an ambition over Poland.

  1. Constitution and New Government

    No anti-federalist papers, but tried to make case for themselves a. Ignored by press 4. Retorted to negative argument a. Constitution was illegal i. If by Confederation standards- it was b. New Gvnt wud up taxes & dictatorship & make laws only 4 the "well born" i.

  2. articles vs. constitution

    Congress held all the central government's central power. The States were sovereign under the Articles while the national government had no real control over the States or over the citizens because of past troubled experiences under a monarch rule. It did not give the national government the power to tax,

  1. u.s. constitution

    People are protected from double jeopardy because a verdict from a jury should be final; the prosecution is unable to appeal once a decision is made. To avoid self-incrimination, defendants have the right to remain silent for many people were tortured and forced to confess crimes in the past.

  2. La URSS y el comunismo asitico

    La presidencia de Nixon La llegada a la presidencia de Richard Nixon en 1969 llevó consigo importantes cambios en la política interior de Estados Unidos, aunque sin abandonar una línea de profundo saneamiento de la situación económica. En el ámbito de las relaciones internacionales, el país se desembarazó finalmente de

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work