[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: joseph storey.jpg (14 KB, 409x488)
14 KB JPG
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816) was an important early Supreme Court ruling that definitely established the Court's powers of judicial review and supremacy over state courts. During the US War of Independence, Virginia had passed a law allowing the confiscation of Loyalist property. Land owned by a Loyalist, Denny Martin, in the Northern Neck was confiscated and handed over to David Hunter. As part of the Treaty of Paris that ended the war, these confiscations were nullified and Martin was able to sue to for the return of his property. The trial court ruled in favor of him but on appeal the state supreme court upheld the confiscation. The court did not claim that Virginia had the authority to overrule international treaties, but maintained that the treaty did not cover the dispute in question. On review in Fairfax's Devisee v. Hunter's Lessee (1813) the Supreme Court ruled that the treaty did cover the dispute and remanded the case back to the state supreme court.

After this, the state supreme court ruled that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction over state cases. The Court reversed this on appeal and ruled that it had original jurisdiction over questions of Federal law. Justice Joseph Storey wrote the unanimous opinion; although Chief Justice Marshall wrote most of the Court's opinions, he recused himself from the case as it involved some of his relatives.
>>
Storey argued that the Constitution clearly and definitively granted the Court the right to review state decisions in Article 3, Section 2. If the states could rule on a Federal question, the Supreme Court logically must be allowed to review it. Further, since it was established that the Court could review state executive and legislative acts, it could also review judicial ones. The Court's original jurisdiction was also necessary to maintain consistent interpretation of Federal law. He concluded that the language of the Constitution was by necessity vague as the Framers could not have foreseen every national issue that might arise and some loose construction was necessary.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.