Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Marshall wrote that "a general provision may be made, and power is given to those who are to act under such general provisions, to fill up the details." Marshall's words and future court decisions gave Congress much latitude in delegating powers. It was not until the 1930s that the Supreme Court held a delegation of authority unconstitutional.
Marshall's opinion lays down the foundations of the doctrine of aboriginal title in the United States, and the related doctrine of discovery. However, the vast majority of the opinion is dicta ; as valid title is a basic element of the cause of action for ejectment, the holding does not extend to the validity of McIntosh's title, much less the ...
Marshall, writing the opinion for the majority, announced his discovered conflict between Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and Article III. [l] [191] [m] In this case, both the Constitution and the statutory law applied to the particulars at the same time. "The very essence of judicial duty" according to Marshall was to determine which ...
In 1792, U.S. Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson claimed that the doctrine of discovery was international law which was applicable to the new United States government as well. [27] The discovery doctrine was expounded by the United States Supreme Court in a series of decisions, most notably Johnson v. McIntosh in 1823.
Chief Justice Marshall argued that Congress had the right to establish the bank, as the Constitution grants to Congress certain implied powers beyond those explicitly stated. In the case of the United States Government, implied powers are powers Congress exercises that the Constitution does not explicitly define, but are necessary and proper to ...
This would make the states superior to the federal government. The Court found that this would be inconsistent with the Supremacy Clause, which makes federal law superior to state law. The Court therefore held that Maryland's tax on the bank was unconstitutional because the tax violated the Supremacy Clause. In Ableman v.
Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co., Marshall wrote: "We do not think that the [state] act empowering the Black Bird Creek Marsh Company to place a dam across the creek, can, under all the circumstances of the case, be considered as repugnant to the power to regulate commerce in its dormant state, or as being in conflict with any law passed on the ...
Early in its history, in Marbury v.Madison (1803) and Fletcher v. Peck (1810), the Supreme Court of the United States declared that the judicial power granted to it by Article III of the United States Constitution included the power of judicial review, to consider challenges to the constitutionality of a State or Federal law.