John Marshalls Court :: essays research papers

By the early 1800s, the debate over Federal power which had been so tactfully postponed when it surfaced in previous efforts at unification (i.e., the Constitutional Convention) had again inevitably reared its head once the government was established and the neutral greatness of Washington's reign had ended. As the major issue of the day, the controversy of States' rights versus big government permeated politics in a profound depth and completeness: it was reflected in the core beliefs and platforms of the major political parties of the day, and most issues were at unobtrusive levels reflections of this central conflict. Prominent politicians of the day, such as John Marshall and Thomas Jefferson, were also outstanding thinkers with very strong opinions on this issue. Several Acts of Congress proved the Legislature to be an effective battleground for the issue of federal power. In the end of the 18c, the Federalist Party enjoyed great political influence. Presidents and many congressmen represented the party's goals and served as opponents to those who sang too loudly the praises of "States' rights". Thus, Congress succeeded in passing legislature that seriously challenged individual rights. The Alien Act made assimilation and naturalization more difficult for immigrants, and the Sedition Act posed a substantial threat to First Amendment rights, as it specified punishment for "writing, printing, uttering, or publishing any false, scandalous, or malicious writings" about virtually any branch or aspect of the U.S. government. Such a clear subordination of individual rights to Federal power evoked a strong Republican backlash, in both State Assemblies and ballot boxes. The Kentucky Resolutions were passed in State legislature atta cking the Sedition Act, stating that "whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthorized, void, and of no force†¦" (D) Two years later, Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson was elected President and Congressional elections followed similar trends, ending the long-time Federalist dominance. A second issue touched upon by the Kentucky resolutions was that of judicial review. The Resolutions asserted that "the government created by this compact" (i.e., the Constitution) "was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself†¦" (D) This attacked the power of the Supreme Court to decide the constitutional validity of law and thus posed a threat to an important check on Legislative power. This document would not, however, dictate the future role of the Supreme Court; that precedent was instead set by Chief Justice John Marshall, in practice as well as in his 1803 Marbury v.