Tsay 1

Ap US Government
10/7/2015

Essential question: How have Supreme Court decisions, such as McCulloch v. Maryland,
impacted the evolution of the federal system?
While it is true that supreme court establish precedents that last throughout the U.S
history, often times the supreme court is more influenced by the societal values, power structure,
and major influences of its concurrent time rather than by the true principle and ideals prior cases
are trying to upheld; Although the Supreme Court officially upheld prior cases, it interprets the
meaning in such a way that benefits major influences of that time, undermining the original
ideals the previous cases were trying to enforce. This essay will attempt to support the claim by
comparing the Supreme Court decisions passed during the gilded age and how it undermines
previous court decisions aimed at strengthening the federal government.
In the early days of American History, John Marshall, with a series of court cases, ruled
in favor of a strong government. (McCullough v. Maryland establish implied power through
elastic clause and affirms the supremacy clause) Later on, through Gibbon v Ogden, the Supreme
Court affirms the federal government's power to rule over interstate commerce.
Although by strictly looking at the court cases, very few of these laws are overridden directly, the
Supreme Court often circumvent the precedent by shifting the focus to other amendments
through different interpretations. These "different perspectives" are heavily influenced by
interests and social perceptions rather than the original ideals the court decisions are meant for.
Take the gilded age for example, during this period, the Supreme Court greatly
supported business interest at the expense of the federal government; furthermore, the Supreme
Court passed decisions that greatly boosted individual states rights. The Supreme Court for the
Slaughterhouse Cases of 1873 ruled that the state of Louisiana has the constitutional right to help
or set up a monopoly and did not violate the 14th amendment because doing so is for public good.
Munn v. Illinois case further emphasized the right of states to protect monopolies through this
case by giving state the right to regulate private business if public interest or good is at stake.
Minor v. Happersett case resulted in the ruling that citizenship does not necessarily mean the
right to vote. Williams v. Mississippi further this by ruling that states have the right to set own
voting standards and there are no evidence that poll taxes and literacy tests are discriminatory.
All of these rulings are examples that strengthen the states power by either affirming its rights to
regulate interstate commerce (thus justifying monopoly), or giving states power to undermine the
14th amendment. These interpretations greatly benefited the Southern States to continue
discriminatory rights by passing literary tests, poll tax, or measures that systemically prevents
blacks from voting. These rulings also greatly benefit business magnates; by being legally
protected to form monopolies at the state levels, businessmen can often bribe governments to
support their monopolies, further worsening the corruption that the period was infamous for. The
rulings of The Civil Rights Cases in 1883 also seek to undermine the precedent's power. The
Supreme Court ruled in favor of the states by justifying the 10th amendment over the elastic
clause and the supremacy clause, ruling that the 14th amendment only applies to the government
and not to the individual. All in all, the mentioned gilded age rulings all seek to undermine

Tsay 2

precedents set forth by John Marshall; it strengthens states power to regulate trade and affirms
the 10th amendment to severely limit the federal governments power.
Despite all the overwhelming rulings in favor of state powers, there are three decisions that
affirm the federal powers during the gilded age. All three are ruled, however, in the favor of
businesses. The first one (In re Debs 1895) justified federal government's power to break up
strikes, the second (U.S. v. E.C. Knight Co 1895) affirms the government's power to regulate
trading business (since the principle is a firmly set precedent thus undeniable), but the court
shrewdly categorize many monopolies as manufacturing business, preventing them from being
regulated by the Sherman Antitrust Act. The last may seem to be aligned with John Marshall's
original vision. The Supreme Court affirms the federal government's power to regulate railroads
in the Wabash, St. Louis, & Pacific Railway Co. v. Illinois case. Looking into the event,
however, we can see the Supreme Court is simply choosing the lesser of evils for the railroad
monopoly. By ruling in favor of the Federal government, the Supreme Court bought the railroad
company extra 29 years before the maximum rate was regulated by the Hepburn Act instead of
being subject to immediate regulation by the State of Illinois. All three court rulings, by looking
at the outright effects, did very little to further the federal governments power.
By looking at the manipulations of rulings by the Supreme Court during the gilded age to
promote interests of that time period, it is clear that the rulings all predominantly favor business
interests. As fellow members of society, judges are influenced by concurrent ideologies and
influences, ruling based on personal convictions rather than objective applications of principles
set forth by precedents (those are only used as tools to further aid businesses). In conclusion,
although John Marshalls early court cases sets clear power for the federal government, the
impact is severely limited by shifting ideologies and influences on society. Judges shifts
emphasis between the 10th amendment or technicalities and Marshalls precedents based on
concurrent social context. Thus, it is very hard to argue that cases like McCulloch v. Maryland
help instill a perpetual strong federal government.

Works Cited
"The Impact of the Supreme Court." The Supreme Court Compendium: Data, Decisions, and
Developments (2015): 777-804. Decisions of the Gilded Age Supreme Court. Web.
"Interstate Commerce Commission." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 07 Oct.
2015.
"Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Illinois." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d.
Web. 07 Oct. 2015.