AMH 3551

First Assignment

 

At the bottom of this page are links to three famous, early cases by the Supreme Court: Gibbons v. Ogden, McColloch v. Maryland, and Barron v. Baltimore. Please read them over. I would like you to then pick two of the cases and write an essay explaining how these two cases either reinforce, or contradict, the theory of the constitutional order set out in the Rakove book. To put this assignment another way, do the two cases you picked show Marshall and the Supreme Court endorsing or moving away from the “original intent” of the constitution as defined by Rakove? (You should also note that these cases were decided in different decades, and you might want to talk about whether the Court’s attitude seems to be changing over time.)

 

In answering your question you will want to remember that Rakove has a complicated theory of original intent, and you should explain it in your paper. You should also give examples from the book and the decisions to support your analysis. For example, it is not helpful to say “Rakove demonstrated that the framers wanted a strong president, but these cases show that this was not true.” It is helpful to write: “Rakove indicated (p. 515) that the framer’s wanted the president to be “just like King George.” In fact, as Rakove shows, Madison went so far as to repeatedly hold George the III up as a model for the convention. (Rakove, pp. 520, 521, and 524-525) And it is obvious that Chief Justice Marshall agreed. His reference to George the III in Gibbons, describing him as “a luminous model for any president” offer one piece of evidence to this effect. And his extended discussion of the role of the kingship in modern England in Barron (insert a quote here) confirms that he shared Madison’s view.”

 

[NOTE: Rakove does not, of course, make an argument that is this silly and none of the sources discuss George the III in this way. I offer this merely as an example.]

 

In answering this question you will also want to spend more time discussing the cases than Rakove. You need to set out Rakove’s theory, but the bulk of this paper should be about what the different cases say.

 

Details about the paper:

 

  • Please consult the syllabus for the appropriate length of the papers. A paper that is slightly shorter is okay, so is a paper that is slightly longer. But a paper that is more than a page too short or a paper that is more than a page too long is not acceptable.
  • You must cite your authority. That means you must cite quotes and any statement by a source, even if it is not a quote, if you are using that interpretation/statement as a basis of your analysis. You may use footnotes or parentheticals, but either way it needs to be clear what page you are referring to. For Rakove, it will be easy to find a page number. For the cases, note that there is a page reference in brackets, like this: [p.215]. Sometimes, they will appear like this [311 U.S. 211, 213, where 213 is the page number]. Use those formats for your citations.  If you are confused about this, consult me before the papers are due.
  • You should NOT use outside sources. This paper should be based only on the cases and Rakove (and your class notes, where you find them helpful). If you use outside sources and indicate it, your grade will be reduced, if you use outside sources and do not indicate it and I catch you, your grade will be reduced for using outside sources and then reduced again for plagiarizing.
  • You should put page numbers on each page of your paper. You should use a normal font type and size (12 pt type is good, Courier, Times New Roman, or Ariel are acceptable type fonts).

 

Cases:

 

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819).

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), Majority opinion (Marshall); concurring opinion (Johnson) (you should discuss both opinions).

Barron v. Baltimore (1833)