THOMAS JEFFERSON PRZECIWKO „POLITYKOM W TOGACH”. KILKA UWAG DOTYCZĄCYCH SPORU O KIERUNKI INTERPRETACJI KONSTYTUCJI STANÓW ZJEDNOCZONYCH

Abstract

Throughout the first decade of the American republic, competing claims between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalist (later Republicans) regarding the proper interpretation of the Constitution and the application of its principles were confined primarily to the executive branch, Congress and states. The year 1801 marked the beginning of a turnabout in the role of the Supreme Court in the national affairs. Thomas Jefferson, having promised to bring about a revolution in the principles guiding the government, took office as the third president of the young nation. Although the legislative and executive branches of government came under the control of Jefferson’s Republican party in the election of 1800, the federal judiciary remained a bulwark of the rival Federalist party. In this article the author argues that differences in the interpretation of the Constitution resulted from the clear and irreconcilable differences in the political and constitutional philosophies of Jefferson and Marshall. These differences sparked fierce debate over such monumental issues as the use of judicial review over acts of Congress and the development of the doctrine of implied powers. According to the author, political considerations were paramount in determining the tactics employed by both leaders in their efforts to define the proper role of the judiciary in a balanced government and the role of the national government itself within the federal system.