Opinion
Story first confronted the argument that Federal Judicial power came from the states, and therefore that the Supreme Court had no right to overrule a state's interpretation of the treaty without its consent. Story found that it was clear from history and the preamble of the Constitution that the Federal power was given directly by the people and not by the States. Story then cited Article III, Sec. 2, Cl. 2, stating that "in all other cases before mentioned the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction" showed a textual commitment to allow Supreme Court review of state decisions. If the Supreme Court could not review decisions from the highest State court, the State courts would be excluded from ever hearing a case in any way involving a Federal question, because the Supreme Court would be deprived of appellate jurisdiction in those cases. Thus, because it was established that the States had the power to rule on Federal issues it must be true that the Supreme Court can review the decision or the Supreme Court would not have appellate jurisdiction in "all other cases." Furthermore, the Supremacy Clause declares that the Federal interpretation will trump the State's interpretation.
Story then quickly rejected concerns over State Judicial sovereignty. The Supreme court could already review state executive and legislative decisions and this case was no different. Story then confronted the arguments that State Judges were bound to uphold the Constitution just as Federal judges were, and so denying state interpretations presumed that the State Judges would less than faithfully interpret the Constitution. Story countered that even if State Judges were not biased, the issue was not bias but uniformity in Federal law. Furthermore, the legislative power to remove a case to Federal court would be inadequate for maintaining this uniformity. Finally, Story applied these principles of Judicial review to the decisions below and found that the state court's decision was in error.
Read more about this topic: Martin V. Hunter's Lessee
Famous quotes containing the word opinion:
“I am not of the opinion generally entertained in this country [England], that man lives by Greek and Latin alone; that is, by knowing a great many words of two dead languages, which nobody living knows perfectly, and which are of no use in the common intercourse of life. Useful knowledge, in my opinion, consists of modern languages, history, and geography; some Latin may be thrown into the bargain, in compliance with custom, and for closet amusement.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (1694–1773)
“Men of integrity are generally pretty obstinate, in adhering to an opinion once adopted.”
—William Cobbett (1762–1835)
“BOSWELL. But what do you think of supporting a cause which you know to be bad? JOHNSON. “Sir, you do not know it to be good or bad till the Judge determines it.... It is his business to judge; and you are not to be confident in your own opinion that the cause is bad, but to say all you can for your client, and then hear the Judge’s opinion.”
—Samuel Johnson (1709–1784)