For each event in Jefferson’s presidency, determine if he stuck to his own Jeffersonian principles and why/why not.
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 Jefferson's supporters in Congress repealed the Judiciary Act, and Jefferson instructed his Secretary of State James Madison not to issue commissions (the official documents entitling them to assume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
In the case of Jefferson and the Supreme Court, it can be argued that Jefferson did not entirely stick to his Jeffersonian principles.
One of Jefferson's principles was to limit the power of the federal government and prevent it from infringing upon individual rights. However, in the Marbury v Madison case, the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice John Marshall, asserted its power of judicial review, which allowed it to determine whether a law passed by Congress was constitutional or not. This decision effectively gave the Supreme Court the final say on what was constitutional, which went against Jefferson's belief that the states should have the power to determine the constitutionality of federal laws.
Additionally, the Supreme Court's ruling in Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston further expanded the power of the federal government. Jefferson had enacted the embargo as a means to punish Britain, but the Supreme Court ruled that federal officers could not restrict commerce at the request of the president, deeming it an infringement upon individual liberty. This ruling upheld the principle of limiting executive power and protecting individual rights, which aligned with Jefferson's beliefs.
Overall, while Jefferson initially sought to weaken Federalist control of the federal judiciary, the decisions made by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Marshall actually strengthened the power of the federal government, particularly the judiciary. Therefore, it can be said that Jefferson did not fully stick to his Jeffersonian principles in this aspect of his presidency.
In assessing whether Jefferson stuck to his own Jeffersonian principles regarding the Supreme Court, it is important to consider his initial goal to weaken Federalist control of the federal judiciary.
On one hand, Jefferson achieved his goal by having his supporters in Congress repeal the Judiciary Act and instructing his Secretary of State James Madison not to issue commissions to the "midnight judges" appointed by Adams. This action was aligned with Jefferson's aim to reduce the influence of the Federalists and their appointees.
However, the Marbury v Madison case presented a significant challenge to Jefferson's principles. Chief Justice John Marshall, although a Federalist, saw an opportunity to define and broaden the court's power and prestige. The decision declared a section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional, asserting that the Supreme Court had the power of "judicial review" to determine the constitutionality of acts of Congress. This power contradicted Jefferson's Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, in which he argued that the states had the authority to judge the constitutionality of federal laws. Thus, the Marbury v Madison decision expanded the role and power of the federal judiciary at the expense of Jefferson's belief in states' rights.
Furthermore, in Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston, the Supreme Court ruled that federal officers could not restrain or restrict commerce at the request or order of the president, deeming it an "encroachment upon individual liberty." This decision can be seen as a confrontation to Jefferson's authority as president and his ability to enforce policies, such as the embargo he enacted in an attempt to punish Britain.
Overall, while Jefferson's initial actions aimed to weaken Federalist control of the federal judiciary, the Marbury v Madison decision and subsequent court rulings demonstrated the Supreme Court's assertion of its own authority and expansion of federal power, which contradicted Jefferson's principles of limited government and states' rights.
In the case of Jefferson and the Supreme Court, it can be argued that Jefferson did not fully adhere to his Jeffersonian principles.
Initially, Jefferson's goal was to weaken the Federalist control of the federal judiciary. He attempted to do this by repealing the Judiciary Act that had been signed by Adams, which created new federal judgeships filled by Federalists. Furthermore, Jefferson instructed his Secretary of State not to issue commissions to these "midnight judges," who had been appointed by Adams.
However, the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice John Marshall, saw an opportunity to define and broaden its power and prestige while avoiding direct conflict with the Jefferson administration. In the Marbury v Madison decision, Marshall declared a section of the Judiciary Act unconstitutional, claiming it exceeded the power of Congress. While the Jefferson administration got its way in terms of preventing the delivery of commissions to the "midnight judges," the decision had unintended consequences. It established the power of the Supreme Court to determine whether an act of Congress violates the Constitution, known as "judicial review," which contradicted Jefferson's belief that the states should have the power to determine constitutionality.
Furthermore, in 1808, the Supreme Court again flexed its federal muscle in the case of Gilchrist v. Collector of Charleston. Jefferson had enacted an embargo to punish Britain, but the Court ruled that federal officers could not enforce the embargo at the request or order of the president, as it was seen as an encroachment upon individual liberty.
Overall, while Jefferson initially aimed to weaken Federalist control of the judiciary, the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Marshall, actually strengthened the power and prestige of the court. This went against Jefferson's belief in states' rights and his desire to limit the power of the federal government.