War of 1812 and the Transformation of National Policies Essay

Submitted By hgieltiak
Words: 829
Pages: 4

The Fed. Legacy
The Marshall Court
War of 1812 Changes politics in the USA
Before the war, federalists strongly supported Alexander hamilton’s idea for a stronger government.
After the war, republicans will split in two groups:
National Republicans (led by Henry Clay) incorporate federalist doctrines in their policies. 1816, Clay helps shepherd through congress a bill to recreate the USA. It’s passed by the congress and the president signs it. Known as the second bank of the US.
Traditional Republicans (how republicans use to be)
Bonus bill (by Henry Clay) - called for national funding of a transportation of roads and canals payed for by the federal government. 1917 Madison vetoes the bonus bill, saying it’s unconstitutional.
Why would madison support the bank? Because it’s hard to finance the war without one.
Democratic party splits into two groups, and the federalist party crumbles.
White males are decreasing and the other races are growing.. Making it harder for the republicans to win. Federalist party was hurt by the war because they were kinda like traders to the winning side.
Bad demographics, disloyalty, ideas are being stolen
1818 republicans outnumber federalists 37 - 7 in the senate. 156 - 27 in the house.
1801 Marshal helps write the constitution. Influences the evolution of the constitution more than anyone else.
Three principles that underlie John Marshal’s jurisprudence:
Judicial authority (Marbury vs. madison)
Supremacy of national laws (McCulloch vs. Maryland) judicial property rights
Asserting National Supremacy
McCulloch vs. Maryland (1819)
Maryland is opposed to the bank of the US. So, they pass a law in Maryland the taxes the branch of the bank in that area. McCulloch refuses to pay that tax. Maryland sues and the case winds it’s way to the supreme court. Maryland offers two arguments against the US:
This bank in a unconstitutional exercise of congressional power.
They have a right to text business in the state.
Marshal used the Necessary Proper clause to support this
McCulloch is the first case to interpret this clause as well as the supremacy clause. Maryland has a second argument: they have a right to text business in the state.
Gibbons vs. Ogden (1824)
Deals with national supremacy.
Important because it’s the first case to interpret the comers clause
Comers clause - Gives congress the right to regulate interstate comers.
1800s the steam boat is invented. Gibbons operates a fairy between New Jersey and Manhattan. Ogden also gets gets a license to operate a fairy, using the costal trade. Gibbons isn’t happy about this, because now there’s competition. Marshal defines comers broadly.
Upholding Property Rights
Federalists and Marshal had a great respect for property rights
Contracts Clause - States cannot impair the obligation of contracts (states cannot interfere with people making valid contracts)
Fletcher vs. Peck (1810)
Georgia legislature grants a large track of land to the Yazoo Land Company. (real-estate speculation, they’re going to sell the land off to farmers and hope to make money). New Georgia legislator broke this contract, and took the land back. By this point, the Yazoo company had been selling the land to farmers. Case goes to supreme court. Marshal says “nope this land grant was a contract, and you can’t suddenly take it back.”
Dartmouth College vs. Woodward (1819)
New Hampshire passes a law