United States vs. Schooner Peggy supports claims that the Marshall Court twisted law to reach rulings that would not antagonize political adversaries. Federalist justices at the turn of the nineteenth century followed the election returns. Ellsworth Court justices consistently reached conclusions congenial to Federalist party interests; the Marshall Court in its first years always reached the result favored by the Jefferson administration. Schooner Peggy, Marbury, and other early Court rulings belie the common assertion that the justices became independent of the executive branch during the Jefferson adminis tration. Both Schooner Peggy and Marbury seek to preserve judicial power by asserting its existence, thus establishing precedents for future use, while not actually attempting to challenge executive or legislative authority in any con troversial way. The real test for a more independent judicial power would come later, when the justices began ordering some elected officials to take actions they did not want to take.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baxter, Maurice G.1984. One and Inseparable: Daniel Webster and the Union . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
Beveridge, Albert J.1919. The Life of JohnMarshall, Vol. 3. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin.
3.
Bloch, Susan Low, and Maeva Marcus.1986. "John Marshall's Selective Use of History in Marbury v. Madison." Wisconsin Law Review1986: 301-37.
4.
Clinton, Robert Lowry1989. Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
5.
Corwin, Edward S.1943. "Samuel Chase." In Dictionary of American Biography, Vol. 4, pp. 34-37. New York: Scribner's.
6.
Currie, David P1985. The Constitution in the Supreme Court: The First Hundred Years 1789-1888. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7.
Dahl, Robert A.1969. "The Concept of Power." In Roderick Bell, David V Edwards, and R. Harrison Wagner, eds., Political Power: A Reader in Theory and Research, pp. 79-93. New York: Free Press.
8.
DeConde, Alexander.1966. The Quasi-War: The Politics and Diplomacy of the Undeclared War with France 1797-1801. New York: Scribner's.
9.
Doidge, J. Richard.1994. "Is Purely Retroactive Legislation Limited by the Separation of Powers?: Rethinking United States v. Klein." Cornell Law Review79: 910-74.
10.
Elkins, Stanley, and Eric McKitrick.1993. The Age of Federalism: The Early American Republic, 1788-1800. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
Elliot, Jonathan, ed. 1888. Debates on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution. New York: Burt Franklin.
12.
Ellis, Richard E.1971. The Jeffersonian Crisis: Courts and Politics in the Young Republic. New York: Norton .
13.
Engdahl, David E.1992. "John Marshall's Jeffersonian Concept of Judicial Review ." Duke Law Journal42: 279-339.
14.
Epstein, Lee, and Thomas G. Walker .1995. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Institutional Powers and Constraints, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press .
15.
Faulkner, Robert K.1966. "John Marshall and the Burr Trial." Journal of American History53: 247-58.
16.
Graber, Mark A.1995. "The Passive-Aggressive Virtues: Cohens v. Virginia and the Problematic Establishment of Judicial Review." ConstitutionalCommentary12: 67-92.
17.
Hamilton, Alexander.1977. The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. 25, ed. Harold Syrett.New York: Columbia University Press.
18.
Haskins, George L., and Herbert Johnson.1981. Foundations of Power: JohnMarshall , 1801-1815. New York: Macmillan .
19.
Hoffer, Peter Charles, and N.E.H. Hull.1984. Impeachment in America, 1635-1805. New Haven: Yale University Press.
20.
Jay, John.1893. The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay , Vol. 4, ed. Henry P Johnson.New York: Putnam's.
21.
Jefferson, Thomas, 1903a. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 10, ed. Andrew A. Lipscomb.Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association .
22.
_. 1903b. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 15, ed. Andrew A.Lipscomb.Washington, DC: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association .
23.
_. 1905. The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 12, ed. Paul Leicester Ford.New York: Putnam's.
24.
. 1975 . The Portable Thomas Jefferson, ed. Merrill D. Peterson.New York: Penguin Books.
25.
Jessup, Dwight Wiley1997. Reaction and Accommodation: The United States Supreme Court and Political Conflict, 1809-1835. New York: Garland Publishing.
26.
Kluger, Richard.1975. Simple Justice. New York: Vintage Books.
27.
Knight, Jack, and Lee Epstein.1996. "On the Struggle for Judicial Supremacy." Law & Society Review30: 87-120.
28.
Knudson, Jerry W1970. "The Jeffersonian Assault on the Federalist Judiciary, 1802-1805: Political Forces and Press Reaction." American Journal of Legal History14: 55-75.
29.
Lincoln, Levi.1802a. "Restitution under Treaty with France." Opinions of the Attorney General1: 119.
30.
. 1802b. "Restoration under Treaty with France." Opinions of the Attorney General1: 114.
31.
McCloskey, Robert G.1994. The American Supreme Court (second edition), revised by Sanford Levinson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32.
Marshall, John.1984. The Papers of John Marshall, Vol. 4, ed. Charles T. Cullen.Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
33.
_. 1990. The Papers of John Marshall, Vol. 6, ed. Charles F Hobson.Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
34.
Nelson, William E.1972. "Changing Conceptions of Judicial Review: The Evolution of Constitutional Theory in the States, 1790-1860. University of Pennsylvania Law, Review 120: 1166-85.
35.
O'Fallon, James M.1992. "Marbury." Stanford Law Review44: 219-60.
36.
_. 1993. "The Case of Benjamin More: A Lost Episode in the Struggle over Repeal of the 1801 Judiciary Act." Law and History Review11: 43-57.
37.
Presser, Stephen B., and Becky Bair Hurley1984. "Saving God's Republic: The Jurisprudence of Samuel Chase." University of Illinois Law Review1984: 771-821.
38.
Smith, Jean Edward.1996. John Marshall: Definer of a Nation. New York: Holt.
39.
Snowiss, Sylvia.1990. Judicial Review and the Law of the Constitution . New Haven: Yale University Press .
40.
Swanson, Claude E., ed. 1938. Quasi-War With France: Naval Operations from December 1800 to December 1801 . Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
41.
Ulmer, S. Sidney.1971. "Earl Warren and the Brown Decision." Journal of Politics33: 689-702.
42.
Van Alstyne, William W1969. "A Critical Guide to Marbury v. Madison." Duke Law Journal1969: 1-47.
43.
Veit, Helen E., Kenneth R. Bowling, and Charlene Bangs Bickford, eds. 1991. Creating the Bill of Rights: The Documentary Record from the First Federal Congress. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
44.
Warren, Charles.1947. The Supreme Court in United States History, Vol 1. Boston: Little, Brown.
45.
White, G. Edward.1938. The American Judicial Tradition: Profiles of Leading American Judges, expanded ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
46.
Whittington, Keith E.1995. "Reconstructing the Federal Judiciary: The Chase Impeachment and the Constitution." Studies in American Political Development9: 55-116.
47.
Wolfe, Christopher.1986. The Rise of Modern Judicial Review: From Constitutional Interpretation to Judge-Made Law. New York: Basic Books.
