For each event in Jefferson’s presidency, determine if he stuck to his own Jeffersonian principles and why/why not. Then, assign him a grade (A-F or numerical) in his overall actions, taking into account context, motive, significance, outcome, etc.
Jefferson & the Supreme Court
One of Jefferson’s first goals as president was to weaken Federalist control of the federal judiciary.On the eve of leaving office, Adams signed the Judiciary Act, which created 16 new federal judgeships, positions which President Adams promptly filled with Federalists. Jefferson's supporters in Congress repealed the Judiciary Act, and Jefferson instructed his Secretary of State James Madison not to issue commissions (the official documents entitling them to assume their posts) to these “midnight judges.”
Four, including William Marbury, filed suit in the Supreme Court, asking the court to order Jefferson to give them their commissions. At the time, the Supreme Court lacked respect or prestige. The Constitution had not delegated many powers or specific responsibilities to the court and was largely seen as insignificant, something Democratic-Republicans in particular liked—a powerful national judiciary could be one more way the federal government could infringe upon rights.
Chief Justice John Marshall saw an opportunity to define and broaden the court’s power and prestige while also avoiding direct conflict with the Jefferson administration. In the now famous Marbury v Madison decision, Marshall declared the section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that allowed the courts to order executive officials to deliver judges’ commissions unconstitutional, claiming it exceeded the power of Congress as outlined in the Constitution. Marbury, in other words, may have been entitled to his commission, but the Court had no power under the Constitution to order Madison or the Jefferson administration to deliver it. So, overall, the Jefferson administration got its way. However, the case had other implications and unintended consequences for Jefferson and the federal government. When Jefferson wrote the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions in 1798, he argued that the states had the power to determine whether federal laws were constitutional. According to the Marbury v Madison decision, the Supreme Court, not the states, had the ultimate power to determine whether an act of Congress violates the Constitution—a power known as “judicial review.” The Supreme Court now had the final say on what was constitutional and what was not.
Years later, in 1808, the court would again flex its federal muscle. Jefferson had enacted an embargo (a ban on trade with certain countries) in an attempt to punish Britain for violating US neutrality. When the federal government tried to detain a ship for violating the embargo, the Supreme Court ruled in Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston that federal officers could not restrain or restrict commerce at the request or order of the president because it was an “encroachment upon individual liberty.
“It is emphatically the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.”
—John Marshall
“Certainly there is not a word in the constitution which has given that power to decide on the constitutionality of a law to [the Judiciary] more than to the Executive or Legislative branches.”
—Thomas Jefferson
Jeffersonian? Why or why not? (use evidence)
In the case of Jefferson and the Supreme Court, it can be argued that Jefferson did not fully adhere to his Jeffersonian principles.
Jefferson's goal of weakening Federalist control of the federal judiciary was achieved to some extent through the repeal of the Judiciary Act, as it prevented the appointment of Federalist judges. However, the unintended consequence of this action was the strengthening of the Supreme Court's power and the establishment of judicial review. This went against Jefferson's belief that the states should have the ultimate power to determine the constitutionality of federal laws.
In the case of Marbury v Madison, Jefferson did not get his way as the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, declared the Judiciary Act unconstitutional. This decision upheld the power of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution and determine the constitutionality of laws. This contradicted Jefferson's earlier argument in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, where he stated that the states should have the power of judicial review.
Furthermore, in the Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston case, the Supreme Court ruled against the Jefferson administration's attempt to enforce the embargo through federal officers. The Court's decision was based on the protection of individual liberty and limited the power of the president to enforce measures like the embargo. This ruling demonstrated the Supreme Court's ability to check the power of the executive branch, which went against Jefferson's goal of expanding executive authority.
Taking into consideration the unintended consequences and outcomes of Jefferson's actions, it can be argued that he did not fully adhere to his own Jeffersonian principles, particularly in terms of limiting the power of the federal judiciary.
Overall grade: C
In evaluating whether Jefferson stuck to his Jeffersonian principles in the context of his interactions with the Supreme Court, there are a few key points to consider.
First, Jefferson's initial goal was to weaken Federalist control of the federal judiciary. This aligns with his belief in limiting the power of the federal government and favoring states' rights. By repealing the Judiciary Act and refusing to issue commissions to the "midnight judges" appointed by Adams, Jefferson was trying to dismantle the Federalist influence in the court.
However, Jefferson's actions were met with resistance from Chief Justice John Marshall in the landmark Marbury v Madison decision. Marshall declared a section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional and established the principle of judicial review, giving the Supreme Court the power to determine whether laws and actions by the government are constitutional. This was a significant expansion of the court's power, which Jefferson may not have intended or supported.
On one hand, Jefferson did achieve his immediate goal of preventing the Federalists from gaining control over the judiciary. On the other hand, the Supreme Court's newfound power and the concept of judicial review went against Jefferson's belief in strict constructionism and the ultimate power of the states to interpret the Constitution.
In the case of Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston, the Supreme Court further reinforced its authority by ruling that federal officers could not enforce the president's embargo as it infringed upon individual liberties. This ruling highlighted the court's ability to limit presidential authority.
Overall, while Jefferson's initial actions aligned with his Jeffersonian principles by seeking to limit Federalist control, the unintended consequences of the Marbury v Madison decision and subsequent rulings went against his belief in limiting federal power and upholding states' rights. Therefore, one could argue that Jefferson did not completely stick to his Jeffersonian principles in this specific aspect of his presidency.
As for grading Jefferson's overall actions, it is a subjective assessment that should take into account the context, motive, significance, and outcome. Based on this perspective, one possible grade for Jefferson's actions regarding the Supreme Court could be a B. While he was initially successful in weakening Federalist control, the unintended consequences and the expansion of the court's power may not align with his original intentions and principles. However, the grade could differ depending on one's particular interpretation and evaluation of Jefferson's actions.
In the case of Jefferson and the Supreme Court, it can be argued that he did not fully stick to his own Jeffersonian principles. According to Jefferson, he believed in a limited federal government and wanted to weaken the power of the federal judiciary, which was dominated by Federalists at the time. However, his actions in this scenario did not align with his principles.
Jefferson attempted to undermine the Federalist control of the judiciary by repealing the Judiciary Act and instructing his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to issue commissions to the "midnight judges" appointed by President Adams. However, his actions were challenged when four of the judges, including William Marbury, filed a suit in the Supreme Court demanding their commissions.
The famous Marbury v. Madison decision presented a dilemma for Jefferson. Chief Justice John Marshall used the case as an opportunity to define and broaden the power of the court while avoiding direct conflict with the Jefferson administration. Marshall declared that the section of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which allowed the court to order executive officials to deliver judges' commissions, was unconstitutional.
Although the Jefferson administration got its way in terms of preventing the appointed judges from assuming their positions, the Marbury v. Madison decision had unintended consequences. It established the power of judicial review, affirming that the Supreme Court had the final say on the constitutionality of laws and could strike down acts of Congress. This went against Jefferson's belief that the states should have the power to determine the constitutionality of federal laws.
Additionally, in 1808, the Supreme Court ruled in Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston that federal officers could not restrict commerce at the request or order of the president, citing it as an encroachment on individual liberty. This decision further demonstrated the power of the federal judiciary in curbing the authority of the president, which was contrary to Jefferson's desire to limit federal power.
Overall, while Jefferson's initial goal of weakening Federalist control of the federal judiciary was partially achieved, the unintended consequences of the Marbury v. Madison decision and the ruling in Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston showed that the Supreme Court had expanded its power beyond what Jefferson had intended or desired. Therefore, in terms of sticking to his own Jeffersonian principles, Jefferson's actions in relation to the Supreme Court can be considered somewhat inconsistent.
Grade for Jefferson's overall actions in this context: C