Trevett v. Weeden

Last updated
18th century Newport Colony House, site of the trial Old Rhode Island State House edit1.jpg
18th century Newport Colony House, site of the trial

Trevett v. Weeden (1786) was a Rhode Island Supreme Court decision finding state legislation regarding paper currency was violative of the state constitution. The decision set precedent for Marbury v. Madison regarding judicial review.

Contents

History

On September 25–26, 1786, the Superior Court of Judicature of Rhode Island (Rhode Island Supreme Court) heard the case in Newport, Rhode Island with a decision by David Howell. In May 1786, the Rhode Island General Assembly passed legislation allowing paper money as legal tender, and in June 1786 the Court created penalties for anyone refusing to accept such currency. In August 1786, the Assembly passed further legislation providing that trial of offenders should take place "without any jury," by a majority of the judges and no appeal was allowed. Both common law and the Constitution of Rhode Island guaranteed a jury trial in contrast to the legislation. [1]

General James M. Varnum, a U.S. Congressman representing the defendant argued that although the American Revolution occurred, the original colonial Constitution was still valid and the assembly derived its powers from this document. Accordingly, the Court retained the power to judge the constitutionality of any legislation under the Constitution. The Court found that the paper currency law was unconstitutional ("not cognizable") because it limited the right to a jury trial for violators. [2]

Aftermath

After the decision, the justices were brought before the General Assembly, reprimanded, and all but one were not reappointed for the following term. The Assembly then appointed paper currency advocates such as William West to the Court. The case was later cited as precedent for judicial review in Marbury v. Madison. [3]

Related Research Articles

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review in the United States, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws and statutes that they find to violate the Constitution of the United States. Decided in 1803, Marbury is regarded as the single most important decision in American constitutional law. The Court's landmark decision established that the U.S. Constitution is actual law, not just a statement of political principles and ideals, and helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate executive and judicial branches of the federal government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Article Three of the United States Constitution</span> Portion of the US Constitution regarding the judicial branch

Article Three of the United States Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the U.S. federal government. Under Article Three, the judicial branch consists of the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as lower courts created by Congress. Article Three empowers the courts to handle cases or controversies arising under federal law, as well as other enumerated areas. Article Three also defines treason.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal government of the United States</span> National government of the United States

The federal government of the United States is the national government of the United States, a federal republic located primarily in North America, composed of 50 states, a city within a federal district, five major self-governing territories and several island possessions. The federal government, sometimes simply referred to as Washington, is composed of three distinct branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, whose powers are vested by the U.S. Constitution in the Congress, the president and the federal courts, respectively. The powers and duties of these branches are further defined by acts of Congress, including the creation of executive departments and courts inferior to the Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary Act of 1789</span> 1789 United States law establishing the federal court system

The Judiciary Act of 1789 was a United States federal statute enacted on September 24, 1789, during the first session of the First United States Congress. It established the federal judiciary of the United States. Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution prescribed that the "judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and such inferior Courts" as Congress saw fit to establish. It made no provision for the composition or procedures of any of the courts, leaving this to Congress to decide.

John Collins, was an American politician and a Founding Father of the United States who, as a member of the Continental Congress, signed the Articles of Confederation. He was the third governor of the U.S. state of Rhode Island from 1786 to 1790.

The Midnight Judges Act represented an effort to solve an issue in the U.S. Supreme Court during the early 19th century. There was concern, beginning in 1789, about the system that required the Justices of the Supreme Court to "ride circuit" and reiterate decisions made in the appellate level courts. The Supreme Court Justices had often expressed concern and suggested that the judges of the Supreme and circuit courts be divided. The Act was repealed by Congress on January 22, 1802.

William West was an American militia general in the American Revolutionary War, Justice of the Rhode Island Supreme Court, Deputy Governor of Rhode Island, and anti-federalist leader. West also was a party in the first U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1791, West v. Barnes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial review in the United States</span> Power of courts to review laws

In the United States, judicial review is the legal power of a court to determine if a statute, treaty, or administrative regulation contradicts or violates the provisions of existing law, a State Constitution, or ultimately the United States Constitution. While the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly define the power of judicial review, the authority for judicial review in the United States has been inferred from the structure, provisions, and history of the Constitution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme court</span> Highest court in a jurisdiction

A supreme court is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts in most legal jurisdictions. Other descriptions for such courts include court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhode Island Supreme Court</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Rhode Island

The Rhode Island Supreme Court is the court of last resort in the U.S. State of Rhode Island. The Court consists of a Chief Justice and four Associate Justices, all selected by the Governor of Rhode Island from candidates vetted by the Judicial Nominating Commission. Each justice enjoys lifetime tenure and no mandatory retirement age, similar to Federal judges. Justices may be removed only if impeached for improper conduct by a vote of the Rhode Island House of Representatives and convicted by trial in the Rhode Island Senate.

West v. Barnes, 2 U.S. 401 (1791), was the first United States Supreme Court decision and the earliest case calling for oral argument. Van Staphorst v. Maryland (1791) was docketed prior to West v. Barnes but settled before the Court heard the case: West was argued on August 2 and decided on August 3, 1791. Collet v. Collet (1792) was the first appellate case docketed with the Court but was dropped before it could be heard. Supreme Court Reporter Alexander Dallas did not publish the justices' full opinions in West v. Barnes, which were published in various newspapers around the country at the time, but he published an abbreviated summary of the decision.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Old Colony House</span> Historic house in Rhode Island, United States

The Old Colony House, also known as Old State House or Newport Colony House, is located at the east end of Washington Square in the city of Newport, Rhode Island, United States. It is a brick Georgian-style building completed in 1741, and was the meeting place for the colonial legislature. From independence in 1776 to the early 20th century, the state legislature alternated its sessions between here and the Rhode Island State House in Providence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial review</span> Ability of courts to review actions by executive and legislatures

Judicial review is a process under which executive, legislative and administrative actions are subject to review by the judiciary. A court with authority for judicial review may invalidate laws, acts and governmental actions that are incompatible with a higher authority: an executive decision may be invalidated for being unlawful or a statute may be invalidated for violating the terms of a constitution. Judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers: the power of the judiciary to supervise the legislative and executive branches when the latter exceed their authority. The doctrine varies between jurisdictions, so the procedure and scope of judicial review may differ between and within countries.

The constitutional law of the United States is the body of law governing the interpretation and implementation of the United States Constitution. The subject concerns the scope of power of the United States federal government compared to the individual states and the fundamental rights of individuals. The ultimate authority upon the interpretation of the Constitution and the constitutionality of statutes, state and federal, lies with the Supreme Court of the United States.

United States v. More, 7 U.S. 159 (1805), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear appeals from criminal cases in the circuit courts by writs of error. Relying on the Exceptions Clause, More held that Congress's enumerated grants of appellate jurisdiction to the Court operated as an exercise of Congress's power to eliminate all other forms of appellate jurisdiction.

Joseph Hazard was a justice of the Rhode Island Supreme Court from May 1786 to May 1787, succeeding Peter Phillips in the office.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States</span> When cases are heard without going through lower courts

The Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction in a small class of cases described in Article III, section 2, of the United States Constitution and further delineated by statute.

<i>Holmes v. Walton</i> New Jersey court case

Holmes v. Walton was a case decided by the Supreme Court of New Jersey in 1780, thought to be the first decision in which an American court held a statute unconstitutional. It is considered a landmark in the American law of judicial review. In an apparently unreported opinion, Justice David Brearley held that a conviction entered by a six-person jury under a 1775 statute was void, because the Constitution of New Jersey required a jury of twelve.

References

  1. Power of Federal Judiciary Over Legislation by John Hampden Dougherty (Putnam, 1912) pg. 28-32
  2. Power of Federal Judiciary Over Legislation by John Hampden Dougherty (Putnam, 1912) pg. 28-32
  3. Power of Federal Judiciary Over Legislation by John Hampden Dougherty (Putnam, 1912) pg. 28-32

Further reading

[1] [2]


  1. Simpson III, Esq, B. Mitchell. "The Case of Trevett v. Weeden: 1786 – 2004". Rhode Island Bar Journal. 65 (6): Page 5.
  2. Conley, Patrick T. "The Story Behind Rhode Island's Most Important Legal Case: Trevett v. Weeden in 1786". Small State, Big History. Retrieved 16 October 2020.