John Marshall (1951)

As young America struggled to reach maturity, it became evident that powerful institutions were necessary to hold family of states together in trouble and dispute. Perhaps the most awe-inspiring of these was the Supreme Court of the United States and the man most closely associated with its formative years was John Marshall, whose wisdom, practicality, and patience gave the Supreme Court its proper place in American government. Marshall was born on the frontier of Virginia in 1755 and when the war for independence broke out in his 21st year, young Marshall enlisted as a lieutenant in the Continental Line. That's enough, Carew, Jessup. While you men fight amongst yourselves, you let the fire go out. Sorry, Lieutenant, but that blaggard said that Massachusetts isn't worth fighting for. You had no call to say what you did about Georgia. What was it, Carew? I only spoke the truth. And for the life of me, I can't see why any Massachusetts man should fight for Georgia or Virginia for that matter, Lieutenant. We're not fighting for Massachusetts and we're not fighting for Georgia. We're fighting for the Continental Congress and the new nation it represents. That's some Congress we're fighting for, sir. They're not paying us, they're not feeding us. All they got is promises. The Massachusetts Assembly could send out a militia that That's enough, men. Look, let's be practical about this. I'm from Virginia and Virginia could probably lick the rest of the states with one hand tied. But I'm not a Virginian. I'm an American. United we stand, divided we fall. Yeah, but the Congress isn't united. Then the army had better be, or the British will unite us all in defeat. You men shake hands. We're all citizens of the same country. Lieutenant John Marshall was later promoted to the post of Deputy Judge Advocate, because of his ability to settle disagreements between the men. While still in active service, he studied law for a short time at William and Mary College. Then, 3 years later, after hanging out his shingle in Richmond, John Marshall married Polly Ambler. Don't worry, dear. The doctor tells me that we'll be dancing the minuet together in no time at all. Certainly, John. But you'll have to wear a neater cravat than that. I want you to go into politics, John. Get yourself a seat in the Virginia legislature. Let's be practical, Father. I'm a lawyer, not a politician. Well, the fact is you're just getting started as a lawyer. You're going to own a lot of land, but you haven't any clients. Unfortunate, but true. Very well, then. The way to get clients is to go into politics. And the way to protect your property is to go into politics. You want Polly to be happy, to be proud of you, to want for nothing. Very well, then. You've got a responsibility, John, to make the most of your opportunities. And even more, your country is still very sick, just like Polly. Can you ignore it? So, John Marshall took his seat in the Virginia legislature. He worked to further the movement toward national unity and protection of property. In 1787, he was a delegate to the Virginia Convention, which met to consider the ratification of a new national constitution. In this country, sir, there is no exclusive personal stock of interests. Now, there's no question that on the welfare of the individual, the success of the nation depends. But, to ensure that welfare, the nation must be strong. The central government must be strong. With the ratification of the Constitution and the election of George Washington to the presidency, John Marshall gradually rose to the position of Federalist Party leader in Virginia and became the greatest lawyer in a state of great lawyers. However, a few years after Washington left the White House, the popularity of the Federalists began to wane. I think that you must be a very selfish man, John. I'm practical, General. You can't buy food with prestige. I thought you'd forgiven me for not accepting the Attorney Generalship. I never blamed you. Your personal success has proved that you were right. But, John, I asked you to come to Mount Vernon for only one reason. You must enter the race for Congress. General, politics are an expensive luxury. I can't afford to do it. You can't afford not to. Federalist Party is on its last legs. Private property is in jeopardy. Jefferson and his party are winning more and more support. And even though you respect Mr. Jefferson, you fear his followers. Is that it? What can we do about it? Enforce the Constitution. Use the Constitution to keep the federal government powerful, to maintain order and stability. General, I realize you've devoted your life to making America strong. And I also realize the danger. The states claiming to be power under themselves will only cause fighting amongst us. It's because you realize these things because you realize that the Constitution is not just a piece of paper. That's why John I'll be happier with a man like you in Congress. John Marshall went to Congress and shortly after President John Adams appointed him Secretary of State. But in 1800, Thomas Jefferson defeated Adams for re-election. Before I leave, I'll have done all I can to convert the courts into the last stronghold of our Federalist Party. If we can push the Judiciary Act through Congress before March, I can appoint a Federalist to every post. We can fight Jefferson from there. You needn't worry, Mr. President. The Act will pass. The courts shall remain in our hands. Yes, all but for one office, the most important of all. This letter is from John Jay. He has refused to return to the office of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Supreme Court under a system so defective will never obtain the weight and dignity which are essential to its affording due support to the federal government nor can it acquire the public confidence and respect which is the last resort of the justice of the nation it should possess. I'm afraid John Jay is right. The Supreme Court is a blunted sword. Not if the right man holds the position of Chief Justice. Perhaps. But where are we going to find a practical, informed, and hard-headed lawyer who feels the way we do about the judiciary? Mr. Marshall, I have sent your name to the Senate. I rely on you not to ignore my request. Odd that it is a Virginian, an actual kinsman of Thomas Jefferson, who must be the last Federalist, the last rallying point for national unity. Thus, when Thomas Jefferson was inaugurated as third president of the United States, he was sworn into office by the last powerful federalist left in the government. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall, who immediately set out to use the sword and make it sharper. Justice Patterson, Justice Chase, here's how the case of Marbury versus Madison shapes up. Now, President Adams, before he gave up the presidency, filled the courts and every vacant post with federalists under the Judiciary Act of 1801. And Marbury was one of the men he appointed. Yes, but Marbury was never allowed to take office. You see, when Jefferson came in, he instructed Madison, his Secretary of State, not to deliver those papers of appointment. I see. And now Marbury wants us to tell Madison and Jefferson that those papers must be delivered. Well, I propose we do so, sirs. It will show Jefferson he can't bully us. No, Justice Chase, you're missing the point. If we decide against Jefferson, he'll merely ignore our decision and be able to prove that we're powerless to enforce our acts. Actually, Jefferson has won the argument already. The Judiciary Act of 1801 has been repealed, and all of Marbury's are out of the jobs it created. Why will not have us decide the case in Jefferson's favor? It would be equal to admitting ourselves mere servants of the executive. Gentlemen, this case has very little to do with Mr. Jefferson. We're not after him. Our job is to establish the Supreme Court as the final interpreter of the Constitution. And my whole idea is to avoid a fight with Jefferson, and at the same time, establish the court's right of judicial review. Now, I think we can do this. Certainly not with a case of Marbury versus Madison. Oh, yes. If we note that the only reason the Supreme Court has jurisdiction in the case is Article 13 of the Judiciary Act, not by virtue of the Constitution, you see, but by an act of Congress. And if we hold that this act of Congress is unconstitutional, and that therefore we can render no decision in the case, By actually declaring a law unconstitutional, we have established our power of judicial review in fact. And our decision will not be questioned because Jefferson will agree with us. I think it will work, Justice Marshall. It will, sir. And this petty little case of Marbury versus Madison will enable us to set a precedent and give the court its first legal teeth. Gentlemen, I propose a toast. Justice will find a way. By successfully declaring a law unconstitutional through the case of Marbury versus Madison, John Marshall took the first step in establishing the Supreme Court as an effective branch of the federal government. Sir, I insist on the right of the contemporary majority to make laws as it sees fit, and no group of judges As long as those laws are not repugnant to the Constitution, Mr. President. I too have sworn to defend them with my life. Repugnant, unconstitutional. Did it ever occur to you that the Constitution could be interpreted differently? Don't think your decision on Marbury versus Madison has slipped by me, sir. The Supreme Court has assumed, through this power of judicial review, the power of life and death over the will of the people. It can strike it out as a whim. I am Chief Justice of the United States. I'm appointed for life so that without regard for politics, I may act as the voice of reason. Do not use the word whim where the court is concerned. You talk as if the judges alone intended to abide by the Constitution, but I too have sworn to support it. Yes, and we intend to help you do so. I intend to remove your power to set yourself as a watch over me. Whom do you intend to impeach first? Justice Chase? That man is a disgrace to the bench. Very well, Mr. President. We shall be happy to meet you in the Senate. The attempt to impeach Justice Samuel Chase was crushingly defeated in the Senate, and the principle of judicial integrity was now secure from political onslaught. By 1819, the Supreme Court had been filled with new men from Jefferson's party, among whom Joseph Story was the most prominent. Well, my aim isn't as sure as it used to be, Story. You can still beat anyone in the court when it comes to quoits, sir. Yes. But can I swing all you Jeffersonians into agreement with me on McCulloch versus Maryland? How do you see the case, Story? It's another states' rights versus federal government rights case. The state of Maryland levied a tax on the branch of the United States Bank in Baltimore. The question is, can they collect? It goes further than that. Simply, which comes first, an act of Maryland or an act of Congress? The power to tax is the power to destroy. And if we say that Maryland can tax a bank of the United States, what does that mean? It means the nation could continue in operation only by the leave and license of the individual states. The Constitution wasn't written by the state. It was written by the people. Remember the preamble? We, the people of the United States, well, the National Bank is the people's bank if we look at it that way. So, how can the state of Maryland tax the whole people of the United States? That certainly doesn't appear to be just. It isn't practical, either. When the government assumes the power to tax an institution, it says, in effect, "Give us money, or we'll close up your store." Now, one thing the states rights can never say is that a state has the right to tell the federal government to shut down because it won't pay up. The framers of the Constitution certainly never intended that a state could put the federal government out of business. Even you a Jeffersonian can see that. Politically, perhaps not. But as a justice of the Supreme Court, I could say that any act of any state tending to contradict the Constitution should be deemed unconstitutional. Well, that's my decision, too. Now, you find the precedents. With his decision in the case of McCulloch versus Maryland, John Marshall laid the legal foundations on which the theory of strong national power came to rest. During the same session of the Supreme Court, all the justices clubbed together in a single lodging house, and it was here, through his wit and personality, that John Marshall's influence was most potent. Your friend Daniel Webster gave a most touching defense of Dartmouth College today, Justice Story. He's a brilliant orator indeed, sir. But he's apt to cloud the legal mind with emotion. I suggest that we look closely at what is involved here in the case of Woodward versus Dartmouth College. All New Hampshire wants to do is to take over private nonprofit institution. Breaking inviolable charter and a contract or two. What can we do about it legally? I don't like this breaking of contracts any more than you do. The Constitution has made us the highest court of appeal, granted. The Constitution also says the legislature of a state can't pass a law impairing the obligation of contracts. But Justice Marshall, the clause on contracts in the Constitution was never intended to apply in the case of this kind. Let's be practical, gentlemen. We are men who deal in justice. We see an injustice being done. The framers of the Constitution may not have had this kind of case in mind. But the Constitution isn't rigid. It isn't meant to be interpreted strictly. But it's a flexible tool meant to be used broadly in the case of justice. Now, it is only just that Dartmouth College's charter must stand or no contract can stand. Thus, John Marshall strengthened the sanctity of contracts and built the foundation of protection for property of individuals from arbitrary governmental decree. In the next few years, John Marshall dominated the Supreme Court making decision after decision. In the famous steamboat case, Gibbons versus Ogden, the principle was established that only Congress could regulate interstate commerce. And in future cases, John Marshall's voice of reason could be heard using the Constitution to create unity in the nation. But still, John, I can't have you going to the barbecue looking like an apprentice. My dear, after all these years, the members are used to me as I am. Polly, I've tried hard to fight for what I believed was right. Sometimes I wonder What do you mean? Do the states realize that after all, this is one country? They don't. They will just as long as you keep telling them. Now, go to your barbecue, sir. I still wonder. Let me ask you, is the union stronger? I believe it is. Then you've helped build toward the dream of George Washington, a truly united nation. And you've made me very proud of you. John Marshall served as Chief Justice for almost 35 years. During that time, he made the Supreme Court effective in American government. Armed with his decisions, the people of the United States shook off the limitations of sectional differences and sought prosperity as one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The justice that John Marshall built.