Supreme+Court+and+Other+Cases

=**Supreme Court and Other Cases**=
 * Caldwell Harden**

Timeline of all the cases featured media type="custom" key="24875664"


 * Vocabulary**
 * Judicial Review- the ability for the Supreme Court to question laws passed by the Legislative branch to determine if they are constitutional or not. John Marshall established this during his reign as Chief Justice.**
 * Judgement-Once the Supreme Court has ruled one of the judges will write a judgement, which explains what the thought process behind the ruling is. The judgement often reveals whether or not the Supreme Court believes a law is constitutional.**
 * John Marshall-was Chief Justice elected by James Madison. With his guidance the Supreme Court's role and position in government was created; he created the idea of judicial review.**
 * Writ of Habeus Corpus- means trial by jury. Lincoln suspended this right during the American Revolution, which many believed a violation of basic rights.**
 * Court of Appeals- in order for a case to reach the Supreme Court, it has to go through a series of courts where the ruling is continually overturned until it reaches the Supreme Court; the Supreme Court's ruling is final.**
 * Supreme Court-established by Article III of the Constitution in 1789 and considered the highest court in the land (with the exception of the basketball court above the Supreme Court). It stands as the federal interpretater of the law (judicial review).**
 * Dissenting Opinion-the opinion piece written by the minority of the judge.**
 * Jurisdiction- who has the right to hear and try a case.**

John Peter Zenger Case-1733 John Peter Zenger printed The New York Weekly Journal, in which he printed about the corrupt royal governor William Crosby. He did not write the article in question because the writers were anonymous and he choose not to give their names. Quickly after it was printed, he was charged with libel (at this time the Supreme Court had yet to be established). During this time libel was considered to be printing anything that opposed the government. Alexander Hamilto n, hearing of Zenger’s trial chose to be his attorney. Hamilton admitted that Zenger printed the articles in question, but he told the jury to prove that Crosby was NOT corrupt. The jury only took 10 minutes to deliberate and found John Peter Zenger not guilty. Even though the Constitution was not yet in place, this case was the precedent for the First Amendment and leading up to the American Revolution allowed other newspapers to publish freely and without fear of prosecution. [|__http://www.ushistory.org/us/7c.asp__]

Marbury vs. Madison-1803 When John Adams lost reelection to Thomas Jefferson, he made a series of appointments that came to be known as the “midnight appointments” in order to leave office with a Republican presence still intact. Jefferson asked his Secretary of State James Madison to prevent these appointments from happening; William Marbury was one of these appointments. The Supreme Court ruled against Madison, but said that they had no jurisdiction over the matter. John Marshall wrote the decision and said that acts of Congress conflicted with the Constitution, that the court can decide which one overrules the other, which set up judicial review. Marbury never received his appointment. [|__http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/marbury-v-madison-establishes-judicial-review__]

Dartmouth College vs. Woodward-1819 Dartmouth College had been founded as a charter by King George III in 1769. New Hampshire decided that it wanted to take the college over and to do this, the original charter contract would have to be changed. The issue in this case was public versus private. The court ruled in favor of the college maintaining a private institution and gave back any buildings or grounds that had been in the state’s possession. Marshall wrote in the judgement that the royal contract predated the birth of the United States and that a state cannot pass the laws that disturb a contract. With this judgement American free enterprise flourished.

McCulloch v. Maryland-1819 After the Bank of the United States had been rechartered in 1816, Maryland decided to tax the bank because it saw the bank as competition. When state banks were failing they often scapegoated the federal bank saying it was competition. To weaken the Bank of United States, Maryland applied a heavy tax to it. When James McCulloch, the cashier of the Maryland branch, refused to pay the tax and debts from the tax, Maryland sued him. In the state court, the judge ruled in Maryland’s favor, as well as in the court of appeals. Finally the case went to the Supreme Court, where in an unanimous decision in McCulloch’s favor, they ruled that the tax was unconstitutional. Marshall wrote in the judgement, “ l et the ends be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the constitution, are constitutional.” What Marshall means is that Congress holds the authority to pass any laws that are to the benefit of the country. He also wrote that federal laws held superior over state laws, which would prove necessary in the American Civil War. [|__http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_mcculloch.html__]

Gibbons v. Ogden-1824 Gibbons and Ogden were competing steamboat operators and Aaron Ogden had been given the exclusive contract to operate his steam boat between New York and New Jersey. When Gibbons started operating his steamboat, Ogden sought to shut him down in a New York State Court, which ruled in Ogden’s favor. Gibbons went through appeals and eventually ended up at the Supreme Court, where he cited the 1793 act of Congress that regulated coastal commerce. The Supreme Court ruled in Gibbon’s favor saying that no state has the right to regulate commerce between two states. This case allowed for the Supreme Court to judg e the Commerce Clause. The ruling in this case allowed for federal control over commerce. [|__http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_gibbons.html__]

Worcester v. Georgia-1832 Georgia had arrested Samuel Worcester, a missionary who opposed Cherokee removal, on the premise of being on Native American lands without a license. Worcester was working as a postmaster on Cherokee lands. Georgia law had said that it was forbidden to be a Non-Native American on Native American lands. When this case reached the Supreme Court, it ruled in Worcester’s favor throwing out his previous conviction. Marshall in the judgement wrote that it was unconstitutional for the state or federal government to make laws in Native American territory, an area where they had no jurisdiction. It s et the precedent for tribal sovereignty, which meant that tribes are allowed to overrule federal government. [|__http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worcester_v._Georgia__]

Dred Scott v. Sanford-1857 Dred Scott had been bought as a slave by Dr. Emerson and then taken to the Wisconsin Territory (apart of the Missouri Compromise) where slavery was not permitted. After living there for four years and working other jobs when his master was away to purchase his family’s freedom. Emerson died so Scott tried to buy his freedom from his wife, but she refused. Dred Scott sued Sanford (Emerson’s wife’s brother who was taking care of her affairs) for his freedom saying that he was already free since he lived in a territory where slavery was not allowed. The court ruled in Sanford’s favor. After this judgement, Scott sued for abuse he had suffered in Supreme Court. Judge Taney, who wrote the judgement, said that under the Missouri Law had already deemed Scott unable to sue because he was not a citizen, only a slave and living in a free state does not make a slave free. Taney wrote that slaves were considered property in the eyes of the court and under the 5th Amendment the court could not take away one’s property without reason. [|__http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_dred.html__] __http://video.pbs.org/video/2298073069/__ media type="custom" key="24877824"

Ex Parte v. Milligan-1866 The Union arrested Lamden in Indiana (a non-rebelling state) for conspiring against the Union on a multitude of charges. He was tried in military tribunal and found guilty with the death penalty. One the day before his execution for ‘writ of habeas corpus’ which meant that he was being held unfairly by the government. Milligan argued that he should have been tried in a civilian court where the punishments are usually less severe. At the end of the civil war, the Supreme Court agreed to review Lamden’s petition. The Supreme Court ruled in Lamden’s favor saying that he should have been tried in a civilian court since they were still functional and that he was denied his right to a ‘trial by jury.’ In the judgement, the Court expressed concerned over Martial Law, which can jeopardize one’s basic rights. [|__http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_exparte.html__]

Chief Justice John Marshall is arguably the most influential chief justice that has ever served, he remained chief justice long after the decline of the Federalist Party. Marshall can be credited with creating the role and relationship of the Judicial branch to the Legislative branch by establishing judicial review. He favored strong central government, which is evident in some of his rulings (McCulloch vs. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden). He was involved with some controversial cases like Marbury v. Madison, but his greatest impact on United States History is the beginning of judicial review, which allows the court to determine whether laws or unconstitutional or not. Works Cited "Marbury v. Madison establishes judicial review." __History.com__. A&E Television Networks. 12 Jan. 2014 . McBride, Alex. "Landmark Cases: Dred Scott v. Sanford." __PBS__. PBS. 12 Jan. 2014 . McBride, Alex. "Landmark Cases: Ex Parte Milligan." __PBS__. PBS. 14 Jan. 2014 . McBride, Alex. "Landmark Cases: Gibbons v. Ogden." __PBS__. PBS. 13 Jan. 2014 . McBride, Alex. "Landmark Cases: McCulloch v. Maryland." __PBS__. PBS. 12 Jan. 2014 . "The Trial of John Peter Zenger." __Ushistory.org__. Independence Hall Association. 12 Jan. 2014 . "Worcester v. Georgia." __Wikipedia__. 01 June 2014. Wikimedia Foundation. 14 Jan. 2014 .
 * As a whole, what was the effect of the Marshall Court on the first half of the 19th century?**
 * Bibliography**