[GarySpFc]

Do you know who is considered by almost all to be the greatest justice to ever serve on SCOTUS? Did you realize this person had only briefly studied law? Did you know he did not have any judicial experience when he was appointed chief justice, and yet he is considered the person who had the most influence on Constitutional Law? Have you ever heard of John Marshall? His single greatest attribute, which has been lacking in many of the recent justices to SCOTUS was character.

John Marshall-Biography

Experience: No prior judicial experience. Marshall held many political offices at the state and national levels.

John Marshall was born in a log cabin on the Virginia frontier, the first of fifteen children. He was a participant in the Revolutionary War as a member of the 3d Virginia Regiment. He studied law briefly in 1780, and was admitted to practice the same year. He quickly established a successful career defending individuals against their pre-War British creditors.

Marshall served in Virginia's House of Delegates. He also participated in the state ratifying convention and spoke forcefully on behalf of the new constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation.

Marshall contemplated several offers to serve in the Washington and Adams administrations. He declined service as attorney general for Washington; he declined positions on the Supreme Court and as secretary of war under Adams. At Washington's direction, Marshall ran successfully for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives but his tenure there was brief. Adams offered Marshall the position of secretary of state, which Marshall accepted. When Ellsworth resigned as chief justice in 1800, Adams turned to the first chief justice, John Jay, who declined. Federalists urged Adams to promote associate justice William Paterson to the spot; Adams opted for Marshall.

Marshall's impact on American constitutional law is peerless. He served for more than 34 years (a record that few others have broken), he participated in more than 1000 decisions and authored over 500 opinions. As the single most important figure on constitutional law, Marshall's imprint can still be fathomed in the great issues of contemporary America. Other justices will surpass his single accomplishments, but no one will replace him as the Babe Ruth of the Supreme Court!

http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/legal_entity/13/overview

[chris1]

So now Meirs is like John Marshall?

[Mr Rogers]

It was silly and stupid for Laura to go along with the idea that conservative opponents are sexists who believe Meirs is unqualified because she is a woman.

The opposite is true - can you imagine the reaction if GWB nominated his personal lawyer, HARRY Meirs, to the Supreme Court?

[Always Right]

Do you know who is considered by almost all to be the greatest justice to ever serve on SCOTUS? Did you realize this person had only briefly studied law?

Do you realize most people who are concerned about her don't care what her background is or that she is a female. What people care about is how she will rule. Harriet is an intelligent lady with a somewhat impressive background. But she also has a history of supporting Democrats, being a compromiser, and as a politically correct bureaucrat. The concern is that Harriet will be a pro-life O'Connor. An improvement on a few votes, but still disappointing in many important areas.

[Panerai]

Sheesh ... do you plan to cut and paste this into every thread about Miers, it's getting a bit old.

[Huck]

John Marshall was also trained in the law by an actual Founding Father:

In 1779, when the College of William and Mary created the nation’s first chair in law, George Wythe was the first scholar to receive that honor. In the course of his long teaching career, he trained Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, and John Marshall in the law.

[Barney Gumble]

John Marshall was in the House of Representatives and Secretary of State.

Harriet Miers ran the Texas Lottery Commission.

[dinoparty]

Note: Marshall "spoke forcefully on behalf of the new constitution".

Has Meiers spoken forcefully on behalf of any cause?

[Condor51]

No offense but please quit SPAMMING every thread with this nonsense. This isn't 1800 and 'Harry' Miers ain't John Marshall.

BTW just curious, what was you're MOS? You're home page doesn't mention it.

[ContemptofCourt]

Please don't take this personally, but your attempt to analogize John Marshall to Harriet Miers is just absurd.

While Marshall may have only studied the law "briefly," that was the common practice at the time. Moreover, he was trained from day one to become a lawyer. In addition, his formal legal training was at the hands of Founding Fathers.

Marshall was also very active politically, leading the Federalists in VA, and was in the House of Delegates when they were debating the adoption of the Constitution. In fact, he made a famous speech during this time regarding the importance of a strong judiciary.

Of course, he was never the head of the VA bar.....

[PzLdr]

Did you know that Joghn Marshall invented the shell game we call judicial review? That the first activist opinion was MARBURY v. MADISON? I wouldn't be praising him to argue for Miers.

[Wonder Warthog]

Yeah, and the "Marshall Court" was guilty of the first (and biggest) usurpation of power by the Court, aggragating to themselves the "right" to unilaterally overrule Congress.

Imagine how it would be today if Marshall had set the precedent of pointing out to Congress that no authority existed in the Constitution for an action taken, and SUGGESTING THAT THEY AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO CORRECT THE SHORTCOMING.

[Republican Party Reptile]

That's nice ... and besides not having prior judicial exp, in what OTHER ways are Miers equally qualified as Marshall?

If no prior judicial exp is a sufficient qualification onto itself, how about me for the SC?

[semaj]

Thanks for your #4. I keep saying it doesn't take a rocket scientist to make a good Jurist. All it takes is honesty, and a sense of fairness, the ability to think logically, and to express one's thoughts in a clear and concise manner.

Those that claim otherwise are high on themselves.

[sonsofliberty2000]

To me it does not matter if the nominee is a justice or not. It is all about the views of the nominee. I'm sure she is an excellent lawyer, and a great person, but is she a good nominee in relation to her views on abortion and other issues? When the First Lady of the US starts saying that the conservatives are perhaps sexist we need to sit back and consider what in the world is going wrong here.

---

[GretchenM]

John Adams considered his nomination of Marshall as one of the best things he did for the new republic.

[WaterDragon]

Thanks. That's good info.

[jla]

I myself interpret GarySpFc's intention as being that Marshall and Miers share similar mindsets and behavior patterns. It's not that Harriet and Marshall think alike, but rather that they reason alike. These then would/should make them amenable to pro-constructionists.

And I believe that Harriet's relative inexperience in constitutional law is a plus for her going in.
She'll bring a new approach in rulings of the SCOTUS in that she won't think it a prerequisite to necessarily pore over every available word dealing with a particular case. No, she might just review an argument for a case and then judge how are Constitution, or the framer's intent, deals with it. How many times has a ruling based on precedent, whether that precedent is true or not to the Constitution, brought derision and scorn from the pro-constructionists?
There is no doubting Harriet's intelligence. And I don't think there should be any doubting her ability to read 'document A', (a case), and determine it's relevancy to 'document B', (the United States Constitution).

[AndyJackson]

When Marshall was appointed to the SC he was not an unknown nobody, but one of the most distinguised leaders of our early republic. Your distortion of his record is a travesty, and I will chase your tail all over FR to set the record straight.

Marhsall sutied at William and Mary and studied law under George Wythe (the nation's first Law Professor).

He served in the Revolutionary War in the same regiment as Monreo and rose to Captain. After the war Marshall served as a lawyer and was a Federalist leader in the Assembly. In 1797 he was appointed to negotiate with France. Marshall rejected the extortionate demand for bribes from French officials which became known as the XYZ affair.

Adams asked Marshall to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, but he ran for and was elected to Congress in 1799. Adams appointed his as Secretary of State. Here he strongly opposed violations of American rights on the high seas and adopted a policy which necessitated a strong Navy to give force to American diplomatic protests.

Marshall was appointed Chief Justice in 1801.