Early Supreme Court cases that shaped federal power

Grade 11 Social Studies Worksheet - Building Confidence

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Cards A to C on Marbury v. Madison (the excerpt is exact; the summaries are in our words). Card A, "Marbury v. Madison, in brief". Who made it: historians and government agencies writing today. When: today. For whom: readers today. Why: to sum up what is known. Summary in our words, not a quotation: In 1801 John Adams, the outgoing president, named William Marbury a justice of the peace. James Madison, the new Secretary of State, did not deliver the commission. Marbury asked the Supreme Court to order Madison to deliver it. In 1803 the Court said Marbury had a right to the commission, but it could not order Madison to deliver it, because the law that let Marbury ask the Court directly went against the Constitution and was void. Who gained: the Supreme Court, which gained judicial review. Who lost: William Marbury, who did not get his commission. Card B, "Marbury: how the Court reasoned". Who made it: historians and government agencies writing today. When: today. For whom: readers today. Why: to sum up what is known. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Step one: Marbury had a right to his commission. Step two: the law of 1789 let him ask the Court directly, but the Constitution lists the cases the Court may hear first, and his was not on the list. Step three: a law that clashes with the Constitution is void, so the Court could not order Madison to deliver the commission. Card C, "Marshall in Marbury v. Madison". Who made it: Chief Justice John Marshall, writing the opinion of the Supreme Court. When: 1803. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to explain and justify the Court's decision. Excerpt (Marbury v. Madison, opinion of the Court): "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound [explain] and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each."

2. 1.

   Ari reads Card C: "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is." Which claim does the passage support by itself?

   • The Court could order Madison to deliver it, since the duty to say what the law is includes the power to command
   • Courts must decide between conflicting laws, since the passage says judges explain the rule and decide on each law
   • The law of 1789 was void, since the passage says the courts decide between laws that conflict
   • Marbury had a right to his commission, since a court that says what the law is protects the rights of those who sue
3. 2.

   Bo combines Cards A, B and C. Which question can the three cards answer together?

   • What did Marbury ask the Court to order, and on what ground did the Court say it could not do so?
   • Why did Madison refuse to deliver the commission, and what did he hope to gain by holding it back?
   • How did later Presidents respond to the Court's claim of power to void a law of Congress?
   • Which part of the Constitution lists the cases the Court may hear first, and how long is that list?
4. 3.

   Jun writes one sentence about the outcome. Which sentence do Cards A and B support?

   • The Court could not order the commission because Marbury had no right to it under the Constitution's list of cases
   • Marbury had a right to the commission, but the Court could not order it: the 1789 law clashed with the Constitution
   • The Court ordered Madison to deliver the commission because the 1789 law gave Marbury the right to ask
   • The Court voided the whole Judiciary Act of 1789, since a part of it clashed with the Constitution

5. Use this

   Cards A to C on McCulloch v. Maryland (the excerpt is exact; the summaries are in our words). Card A, "McCulloch v. Maryland, in brief". Who made it: historians and government agencies writing today. When: today. For whom: readers today. Why: to sum up what is known. Summary in our words, not a quotation: In 1816 Congress chartered a national bank, the Second Bank. In 1818 Maryland taxed banks that Maryland had not chartered. James McCulloch, a cashier at the bank's Baltimore branch, did not pay. In 1819 the Court said Congress could set up the bank, because the Constitution lets Congress make laws that are "necessary and proper" to carry out its listed powers (implied powers). It also said Maryland could not tax the bank, because national law is supreme. Who gained: Congress and the national bank. Who lost: Maryland, which could not tax the bank. Card B, "McCulloch: the Court's two answers". Who made it: historians and government agencies writing today. When: today. For whom: readers today. Why: to sum up what is known. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Question one: may Congress set up a national bank? Yes. The Constitution lets Congress make laws "necessary and proper" to carry out its listed powers. Question two: may Maryland tax the bank? No. National law is supreme, and a state's power to tax could be used to destroy what Congress made. Card C, "Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland". Who made it: Chief Justice John Marshall, writing the opinion of the Supreme Court. When: 1819. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to explain and justify the Court's decision. Excerpt (McCulloch v. Maryland, opinion of the Court): "Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the constitution, are constitutional."

6. 4.

   Card C says means that are "appropriate" and "plainly adapted" to a legitimate end are constitutional. Which statement about the sentence is accurate for Kira?

   • It rests the test on the supremacy of national law over a state's tax, since the sentence concerns Maryland
   • It states a test for means, but not how the test applies to this bank or to Maryland's tax
   • It names no author and no case, so a reader cannot tell which opinion the sentence comes from
   • It allows Congress any means it chooses, since the sentence allows means that are appropriate to a legitimate end
7. 5.

   Luz combines Cards A, B and C. Which question can the three cards answer together?

   • Which other states taxed the bank after 1819, and how did each state's tax compare with Maryland's?
   • Which two questions did the Court answer in 1819, and what test did it use for the first?
   • How did the bank's loans affect Maryland's farmers in 1818, and did the tax make loans easier?
   • How much tax did Maryland charge the bank's Baltimore branch, and why did the lawmakers choose that rate?
8. 6.

   Card C is Marshall's own sentence and card A is a summary written today. How should Milo use the two together?

   • Use card C for the facts as well, since the sentence names the bank, the tax and the cashier who refused to pay
   • Use card C and set card A aside, since a summary written today adds opinion rather than evidence about the case
   • Use the sentence for the Court's test in its words, and the summary for the facts: the bank, the tax and McCulloch
   • Use card A for the test as well, since a summary written today states the Court's test more clearly than Marshall did
9. 7.

   Noah writes one sentence about the ruling. Which sentence do Cards A and B support?

   • Congress could create the bank under its necessary-and-proper power, and Maryland could not tax it
   • Congress could create the bank, but Maryland could tax it because the bank's Baltimore branch stood on Maryland's soil
   • Congress could not create the bank itself, but it could tell the states to charter banks that Congress approved
   • Congress could create any business it judged useful, because necessary and proper reaches any means to any end

10. Use this

    Cards A to C on Gibbons v. Ogden (the excerpt is exact; the summaries are in our words). Card A, "Gibbons v. Ogden, in brief". Who made it: historians and government agencies writing today. When: today. For whom: readers today. Why: to sum up what is known. Summary in our words, not a quotation: New York gave Robert Livingston and Robert Fulton the sole right to run steamboats on New York's waters. Aaron Ogden held a New York license under that right. Thomas Gibbons ran steamboats between New York and New Jersey with a license from the federal government. In 1824 the Court said commerce includes moving people and goods by boat, that Congress may regulate commerce among the states, and that New York's monopoly could not stand against the federal law. Who gained: Thomas Gibbons and other steamboat operators, and Congress's power over trade between states. Who lost: Aaron Ogden and the monopoly holders, and New York's power to grant the monopoly. Card B, "Gibbons: two laws that clashed". Who made it: historians and government agencies writing today. When: today. For whom: readers today. Why: to sum up what is known. Summary in our words, not a quotation: New York's law gave two men the sole right to run steamboats on its waters. Thomas Gibbons held a license from the federal government to run boats between New York and New Jersey. The Court said Congress's power over commerce reaches moving people and goods by boat, and that when the two laws clashed, the federal law won. Card C, "Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden". Who made it: Chief Justice John Marshall, writing the opinion of the Supreme Court. When: 1824. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to explain and justify the Court's decision. Excerpt (Gibbons v. Ogden, opinion of the Court): "Commerce, undoubtedly, is traffic, but it is something more: it is intercourse. It describes the commercial intercourse between nations, and parts of nations, in all its branches, and is regulated by prescribing rules for carrying on that intercourse."

11. 8.

    Ren combines Cards A, B and C. Which question can the three cards answer together?

    • Why did New York grant Livingston and Fulton the monopoly, and what did the state expect to gain?
    • Which other states granted steamboat monopolies in the 1820s, and how did the Court treat each of them?
    • Who held the federal license, and why did the Court treat moving people and goods by boat as commerce?
    • How much money did Ogden lose when the monopoly ended, and how did he repay what he owed afterward?
12. 9.

    In Gibbons the Court chose between a New York law and a federal license. What does that setting tell Tala about the ruling?

    • It decided which government's power prevailed, so it matters beyond the two steamboat owners
    • It mainly settled a business dispute between two owners, since the monopoly and the license concerned one route
    • It ended state power over transport, since the federal law now covered each kind of boat and road
    • It was meant to prepare for railroads, which the Court expected to need federal rules by the 1830s
13. 10.

    Zee writes one sentence about the ruling. Which sentence do Cards A and B support?

    • When the laws clashed, New York's law won, since the boats ran on New York's waters and the state controls its waters
    • When a state law clashes with a federal law on any subject, federal law wins, since the Court said so in Gibbons
    • When New York's monopoly clashed with a federal license, federal law won; commerce covers moving goods by boat
    • Commerce means buying and selling goods, so Gibbons won because he sold tickets and cargo between the two states