Martin v Hunter's Lessee Summary

Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee Summary         Lord Fairfax, British loyalist, inherited a large tract of land in Virginia, then left property to his nephew, Denny Martin who had to change his name to Denny Fairfax. Inheritance was complicated by a 1781 Virginia law which stated no enemy could inherit land in the state so the state confiscated the land and began to sell it, including a plot to David Hunter. Martin also began to sell off tracts, among the purchasers were John Marshall and his brother. In 1813, in a 3-1 decision the court upheld Fairfax’s claim stating that the Virginia statue was unconstitutional because it conflicted with the 1783 Treaty of Paris, in which Congress promised to recommend to the states that they restore confiscated property to loyalists. US Supreme Court ordered the Virginia Supreme Court to carry out its ruling where the Virginia Court responded by holding their own hearings to determine whether it should comply. o They reversed the decision, struck the order down and decided Section 25 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional. Virginia’s decision was then appealed to the US Supreme court in the case of Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee where the justices consider the question of whether Congress could expand their appellate jurisdiction as they did in Section 25. o Appellate Jurisdiction: The power of a court to hear appeals from lower courts. This includes the power to reverse or modify the lower court's decision. o Original Jurisdiction: A court's power to hear and decide a case before any appellate review. A trial court must necessarily have original jurisdiction over the types of cases it hears. Case was not settled until case of Cohens v. Virginia o Where the Cohen brothers were tried and convicted for selling tickets for the District of Columbia lottery which was authorized by the act of Congress not Virginia law. So when federal law superseded the Virginia statue, the Supreme Court were compelled to review a Virginia court’s interpretation of a congressional act. Arguments for Denny Martin o Uniform practice since the Constitution was adopted confirms the jurisdiction of the court. Letter of Publius show that it was agreed, both by its friends and goes, that judicial power extends to this class of cases o This government is not a mere confederacy, ;like the old continental confederation. In its legislative, executive, and judicial authorities, it is a national government. Its judicial authority is analogous to its legislative: it alone has the power to making treaties; those treaties are declared to be the law of the land; and the judiciary of the United States Is exclusively vested with the power of construing them  o The states judiciaries are essentially incompetent to pronounce what is the law, not in the limited sphere of their territorial jurisdiction, but throughout the Union and the world. Arguments for Hunter’s Lessee o Under the constitution in which owner was given to the federal government by the states, the US Supreme Court can only review decision of the lower federal courts o If the Supreme Court can exercise appellate jurisdiction over state courts, the sovereignty and independence of the sates will be materially impaired. o State court judges are men of integrity who take an oath to support the US Constitution. They can be trusted to interpret it authoritavely