CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN MARSHALL AND THE U.S SYSTEM OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN MARSHALL AND THE U.S SYSTEM OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
The Jurisprudence in the eye of the law, thou, recognized to have in it current state, as two well established genre; the Common law, and the Constitutional Law, in a canonical form, upon which all divisions of study, is rooted from, then, it globally undoubted, the Americans, are touted, as the lead in Constitutional law, and the foundation of modern written constitutional text.
And for the record purpose, Chief Justice John Marshsall, is acclaimed as the fourth Chief Justice of the United States, and the Principal founder of the U.S system of Constitutional Law. And further, known to have been responsible for constructing, and defending both the foundation of Judicial power, and principles of American Federalism.
John Marshall on records, was born on the 24th September 1755, in Fauquier County near Germantown, in current Virginia State. The American colony as at then, and the revolt, conscribe him to the American Army in the early stage of his life. In the year (1775), he was already serving as a Lieutenant at the age of (20)years, under Captain George Washington, who was then the General and the Commander in Chief of the Colonial Armies, for American Revolution, until his death in the year (1799). During Marshall service in the Army, he went ahead to enlist himself into George Wythe lectures, who was a Law professor and Attorney General of Virginia State, under the College of William & Mary. George Whythe, was a legal scholar and the founding fathers of the United States, as part of the first seven signatories of the United States declaration of Independence from Virginia, serving as a representative of Virginia State, to Continental Congress, and the Philadelphia Convention.
John Marshall eventually rose to the rank of a Captain, in the year (1783) at the age of (28)years, and admitted to bar in the year (1780), and finally, sought to be discharged from the Army completely, in the year (1785) at the age of (30)years, to enter into private law practice, and entered into the Federal Government, as President John Adams’s envoy to France, and later as secretary of [S]tate, while he played the role in the year (1788) convention, at which the Virginia State, ratified the U.S Constitution. On January 20th 1801, John Adams, the 2nd President of the United States, nominated John Marshall, at the age of (46)years, to serve as the youngest Chief Justice, to replace the Chief Justice Oliver Ellisworth, as the 4th Chief Justice of the United States, sworn to office on the 4th February of that same year.
In other to appreciate the crucial role, and relevance of Chief Justice John Marshall, in modern Supreme Court of United States, the reader memory has to be awoke, on the status of the Court prior to the year (1801). It was a Supreme Court, which was relatively insignificant institution. And most legal disputes were resolved at the [S]tate Courts, rather that the Federal Courts, which was expected to be the Omnipotent to the law. It took Marshall’s (34)years tenure, serving as the Chief Justice, to emerge the Supreme Court, out of oblivion, as a formidable force, to be reckon with, by the Federal Government, and to re-shape the Nation understanding of Constitutional law. Having the new Marshall Court issuing series of landmark cases, decisions, with greater part written by John Marshall himself, as the Chief Justice, and an adopted practice, contrary to the previous Court procedure, in airing their public cases. This time, the Supreme Court, hand-down, a single majority opinion of the Court, to present a clear rule to the Public, which was defined by Del Dickson in his Article published in (2001) of the Supreme Court in Conference(1940-1985); the Private discussions behind nearly 300 Supreme Court decisions. There is a consensus of the Associate Justices, to build the reputation of the Court, as a source, reliable, predictable and definitive final Judgment, in legal and constitutional matters.
In John Marshall wisdom of personal leadership to the Court, he has set forth his general principles of Constitutional interpretation, and acknowledging his vulnerability, as not widely read and rigour in the law, thou, seldom cite precedents, after the Court comes to a decision by all Associate Justices, he will do the write-up to all the opinions by himself, and call on his long time friend, Justice Joseph Story, with him at the Bench, as a renowned legal scholar, to do the ‘chores’ of locating the precedents, saying, ‘the Story’ that is the law of this case, now go and find the authorities to complete the write-up, as a formal document for the Court. This was the foundational anchor, and the wisdom in steering the Marshall Court, which has become the modern precedent for Supreme Court, practices and procedures, though, slightly modified dependent on jurisdiction affairs.
The following are outlined landmark cases, presided by the Marshall Court, as the Supreme Court of the United States, and the notable dissents from the Chief Justices, John Marshall;
I. Marbury Vs. Madison (1803)
“ It is emphatically, the province and duty of the Judicial Department, to say what the law is. If, Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution, is superior to any ordinary Act, of the Legislature, the Constitution, rather that such ordinary Act, must govern the case, to which they both apply. A law repugnant to the Constitution, is void.”
II. Fletcher Vs. Peck (1810)
“ The question of whether a law is void, for its repugnance to the Constitution, is a question of much delicacy, which ought seldom to be decided, in the affirmative, and doubtful case. The opposition between the Constitution, and the law, should be such that, a Judge is clear and in strong conviction, of their incompatibility, with each other.”
III. MuCulloch Vs. Maryland (1819)
“ Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means that are appropriate, and plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but in consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional.”
IV. Cohens Vs. Virginia (1821)
“ A case arising under the Constitution, or laws of the United States, is cognizable in the Courts of the Union, and whoever maybe the parties to that case.”
V. Johnson & Graham’s Lessee Vs. Mcintosh (1823)
“ Native American inhabitants, are to be considered merely occupants, to be protected, while in peace in the possession of their lands, but deemed incapable, of transferring absolute title to others.”
VI. Gibbons Vs. Ogden (1824)
“ The power to regulate commerce, does not stop at the external boundary of a [S]tate, although it does not extend to commerce, that is completely internal.”
VII. U.S Vs. PERCHEMAN (1832)
“ Private property, generally should not be confiscated, and private right, annulled on a change in the sovereignty of a territory.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Photo of Chief Justice John Marshall © Supreme Court of United States Historical Society
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Tweneboah Senzu, DBA., Ph.D., SJD.
Professor of Constitutional Law and Economic Criminology, fellow, University of Sierra Leone.
Fulbright Research Fellow, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, USA.
Comments