John Marshall Case Analysis

After a year in office as Secretary of State, John Marshall became the fourth, and the longest serving, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the United States. Between 1801 and 1835, Chief Justice John Marshall dominated in the refinement of the nation’s legal structure. In his 34 year term as Chief Justice, Marshall most significantly bolstered the vision that the judicial branch of government had supremacy over all federal courts; however, before Marshall carried out this idea, the judiciary was not its own branch of government. Along with creating a separate branch of government, Marshall very heavily defined the roles of the Supreme Court and Congress through various decision papers. He also provided opinions which helped lay the constitutional

Previous to their case, their firm was a major contender in the land lottery business. However, their firm was located outside of Virginia, meaning they were selling outside of their territory for quick payouts. Even with two of the country’s top lawyers, they were eventually convicted and fined. Most significantly, the problem of this case was if the Supreme Court had authority to listen to the Cohen’s appeal in a case resolved by the courts of Virginia. “One of the instruments by which this duty may be peaceably performed is the Judicial Department. It is authorized to decide all cases of every description arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States.” After much deliberation, it was ultimately decided that the Supreme Court was, and still is, supreme over state courts. “The judicial power of every well constituted government must be coextensive with the legislative, and must be capable of deciding every judicial question which grows out of the Constitution and laws...” Therefore, not only was Chief Justice Marshall able to hear the appeal of the Cohen’s, but it also made any state law opposing the Constitution is

They brought their hope for a separate nation to the courts in the case Cherokee Nation v. Georgia. The Cherokees aimed for justification of the Indian Removal Act against the state of Georgia. However, their wish was denied by the Supreme Court. Although Chief Justice Marshall agreed that they had right to their land, they were not to be a “foreign state.” It did, however, raise question of whether the Indian removal act was constitutional. Why is this?

Be this as it may, the peculiar relations between the United States and the Indians occupying our territory are such that we should feel much difficulty in considering them as designated by the term foreign state were there no other part. But we think that in construing them, considerable aid is furnished by that clause in the 8th Section of the Article, which empowers Congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.

Whether the use of the Cherokee’s was moral or not does not play a factor in the success that John Marshall had in the economic growth of the united