Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: colorado tanker
If that result was so obvious under the Supremacy Clause, what do you think Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. 304 (1816) and Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821) were about? They came out the way you want, because centralizing federalists like Marshall and Story dominated the Supreme Court. But a Jeffersonian Supreme Court would probably have ruled very differently.
127 posted on 08/22/2003 3:21:32 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]


To: aristeides
If that result was so obvious under the Supremacy Clause, what do you think Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. 304 (1816) and Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821) were about? They came out the way you want, because centralizing federalists like Marshall and Story dominated the Supreme Court. But a Jeffersonian Supreme Court would probably have ruled very differently.

Justice Story was a Jeffersonian and a Democrat, appointed to the Court by President Madison.

The result was obvious until the Virginia Court of Appeals decided to defy the Supreme Court in a property case.

You would not find lower federal courts ruling on constitutional questions like this in the 18th and 19th centuries because Congress did not give the lower federal courts federal question jurisdiction until this century.

Justice Story grounded his views in the Martin case in the views of the Founders, whom he personally knew, having been appointed by Madison, the father of the Constitution.

Story said in Martin: "It is an historical fact, that at the time when the judiciary act was submitted to the deliberations of the first congress, composed, as it was not only of men of great learning and ability, but of men who acted a principal part in framing, supporting or opposing that constitution, the same exposition was explicitly declared and admitted by the friends and by the opponents of that sytem. It is an historical fact, that the supreme court of the United States have, from time to time, sustained this appellate jurisdiction, in a great variety of cases, brought from the tribunals of many of the most important states in the Union, and that no state tribunal has ever breathed a judicial doubt on the subject or declined to obey the mandate of the supreme court until the present occasion."

233 posted on 08/22/2003 4:03:31 PM PDT by colorado tanker (Iron Horse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson