Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of the supreme court in us
The role of the supreme court in us
The role of the supreme court in us
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The role of the supreme court in us
Andrew Jackson has been charged with the following crimes: Article 1: Reckless disregard for the economic interests of the citizens of the United States Article 2: Reckless disregard for the principle of separation of powers, and specifically disregarding the authority of the Supreme Court. Article 3: Reckless disregard for the authority of the states, and unlawfully using the power of federal government to suppress that authority. Based on the evidence given by defense and the witnesses; Andrew Jackson is found not guilty of reckless disregard for the economic interests of the citizens of the United States. The national bank only benefitted the wealthy. Jackson vetoing the National Bank and Taney’s agreement to moving federal funds to the …show more content…
Showing that he makes personal decisions instead of political ones. He violated the McCulloh v. Maryland, showing that he did not follow interpretation of the law, ruled by Supreme Court. Jackson violated separation of powers through the destruction of the national bank. Although Jackson believed he would help the poor by terminating the national bank; he did violate the separation of powers. As stated in the McCulloh v. Maryland “the necessary and proper clause gave Congress the right to charter the bank and that if the states could tax the bank, they could also destroy it.” Jackson ultimately disregarded this court decision made by the Supreme Court that the national bank was constitutional. He also defies the Supreme Court by enforcing the Indian Removal Act seeing as he did not hold up their treaty with the Native Americans, denying the interpretation of the treaty. Jackson had no valid reason to kick the Native Americans out of the land they owned first. He forced them to move because of the color of their skin. He did not recognize the Native Americans as citizens and only wanted them out of it because he believed that the land belonged to the white people. He saw himself in a position that higher authority than Supreme Court, showing that he thought he was the president he could do as
As the author of Andrew Jackson and the Search for Vindication, James C. Curtis seems to greatly admire Andrew Jackson. Curtis pointed out that Jackson was a great American general who was well liked by the people. As history shows, Andrew Jackson had his flaws; for example, he thought the National Bank of the United States was going to kill him but he was determined to kill it first. He resented the Bank because he thought it was the reason for the Panic of 1819. Andrew Jackson was elected to the presidency in 1824 after first being nominated in 1822. He was sixty-one when he was elected the seventh president of the United States.
Throughout Jackson's two terms as President, Jackson used his power unjustly. As a man from the Frontier State of Tennessee and a leader in the Indian wars, Jackson loathed the Native Americans. Keeping with consistency, Jackson found a way to use his power incorrectly to eliminate the Native Americans. In May 1830, President Andrew Jackson signed into law the Indian Removal Act. This act required all tribes east of the Mississippi River to leave their lands and travel to reservations in the Oklahoma Territory on the Great Plains. This was done because of the pressure of white settlers who wanted to take over the lands on which the Indians had lived. The white settlers were already emigrating to the Union, or America. The East Coast was burdened with new settlers and becoming vastly populated. President Andrew Jackson and the government had to find a way to move people to the West to make room. In 1830, a new state law said that the Cherokees would be under the jurisdiction of state rather than federal law. This meant that the Indians now had little, if any, protection against the white settlers that desired their land. However, when the Cherokees brought their case to the Supreme Court, they were told that they could not sue on the basis that they were not a foreign nation. In 1832, though, on appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokees were a "domestic dependent nation," and therefore, eligible to receive federal protection against the state. However, Jackson essentially overruled the decision. By this, Jackson implied that he had more power than anyone else did and he could enforce the bill himself. This is yet another way in which Jackson abused his presidential power in order to produce a favorable result that complied with his own beliefs. The Indian Removal Act forced all Indians tribes be moved west of the Mississippi River. The Choctaw was the first tribe to leave from the southeast.
Under the Jackson Administration, the changes made shaped national Indian policy. Morally, Andrew Jackson dismissed prior ideas that natives would gradually assimilate into white culture, and believed that removing Indians from their homes was the best answer for both the natives and Americans. Politically, before Jackson treaties were in place that protected natives until he changed those policies, and broke those treaties, violating the United States Constitution. Under Jackson’s changes, the United States effectively gained an enormous amount of land. The removal of the Indians west of the Mississippi River in the 1830’s changed the national policy in place when Jackson became President as evidenced by the moral, political, constitutional, and practical concerns of the National Indian Policy.
In the summer of 1832 and Congress renewed the Bank’s charter even though it wasn’t due until 1836. Jackson hesitated to approve of the charter, so Henry Clay and Nicholas Biddle went on the offensive to attempt to persuade Jackson to pass the bill. Jackson, having had his opinion on the banks cemented by Clay’s presence in the organization, then committed to de-establishing the Second National Bank. He waged war against Biddle in particular to make sure Biddle lost power. He vetoed the bank bill, and after winning the race to be reelected, he closed Biddle’s bank. He ordered his Secretary of the Treasury to move money from the Second National Bank to smaller, state banks. When Congress returned from its summer recess, it censured him for his actions. In 1836, Bank of US was dead, and the new democratic-congressmen expunged Jackson’s censure. Because Jackson had no formal plan for managing the nation’s funds after the Second National Bank closed, it caused problems in Van Buren’s administration. He destroyed the Bank of the United States, in the main, for personal reasons. Jackson hated the bank before his presidency because as a wealthy land and slave owner he had lost money due to its fiscal policies. He believed that Congress had no right under the constitution to charter a
The validity of President Andrew Jackson’s response to the Bank War issue has been contradicted by many, but his reasoning was supported by fact and inevitably beneficial to the country. Jackson’s primary involvement with the Second Bank of the United States arose during the suggested governmental re-chartering of the institution. It was during this period that the necessity and value of the Bank’s services were questioned.
Federalist no. 78 is persistent in its sort of justifications of the Constitutions vagueness. The letter claims that the judiciary branch is of the least danger of t...
The bank would be more for the rich and the foreign, but have no benefits for the poor. Jackson’s political rival, Daniel Webster, believes that this letter from Jackson showed just how evil Jackson was. Webster does not think Jackson was vetoing for the good of the people, but to ‘stir the pot’. By Jackson sending this letter, it causes a stir between the rich and the poor. The poor would feel imbalanced against the poor, and arguments would rush out.
The issue of whether or not America should have a National Bank is one that is debated throughout the whole beginning stages of the modern United States governmental system. In the 1830-1840’s two major differences in opinion over the National Bank can be seen by the Jacksonian Democrats and the Whig parties. The Jacksonian Democrats did not want a National Bank for many reasons. One main reason was the distrust in banks instilled in Andrew Jackson because his land was taken away. Another reason is that the creation of a National Bank would make it more powerful than...
The removal of the Native Americans was an egocentric move on Jackson’s part. Jackson was only able to see how our removal would benefit the government but was not concerned at all about our values and culture. “It puts an end to all possible danger of collision between the authorities of the general and state governments on account of the Indians” (91). This statement, included in the State of the Union Address, exhibits how Jackson was quick to place blame on the Indians. He was basically saying that if there were any disputes between the general and state governments, it would be because of the Indian’s choice to not leave the land. Jackson was attempting to hold the Indians accountable for a matter that they had no say in. It is evident that Jackson could have are less about the Indian’s home land, where we were birthed and raised our kids. It is clear that the sentimental value of the land did not concern Jackson at all. Jackson felt that he offered us an equitable exchange, but his family was not the one being forcefully removed from their birthland to go to an unfamiliar land. “What good m...
This paper will primarily speak of the violations of the First and Fourth Amendments and the lack of checks and balances in relation to the USA Patriot Act.
The opposing argument serves as a perfect gateway to the topic of relationship between Federal and State government. In the United States, the Supremacy Clause serves...
The Constitution is the pulse of our nation, pumping freedom from sea to shining sea. The Constitution is alive, and it acts as a guide to our leaders throughout the country, granting each citizen their individual rights. President Ronald Regan used the Constitution as framework for countless decisions in his eight years as president, from urging Mr. Gorbachev to “Tear down that wall!”, to maximizing the War on Drugs. President Regan utilized various limbs of the Constitution to serve the people in a multitude of ways, especially through Article II. Though the Article is compact, it has been understood and exercised in many different ways by our presidents. Our
Oh, he was far from it! In September of 1833, he ordered his Treasury secretary to move money carefully selected state banks, which I will now refer to as “pet” banks. Seeing this as a terribly unconstitutional move, the secretary resigned, preferring not to obey Jackson’s order. Quickly following this incident, his enemies in the Senate formally declared his actions as unconstitutional. After crippling the Bank, Jackson prohibited all banks from federal deposits. His stiff-necked effort to limit bank note circulation was a foolish idea and he turned a blind eye in seeing the importance of a banking system in our growing economy. Therefore, unconstitutional actions must be
One of the most unique and vital features of the American government is the establishment of a constitution. This constitution is a result of the fear of tyranny and the idea of rights that are unable to be infringed upon. The Constitution of America became the base of all law and decisions made in court. It gives us the ability to propose and pass laws, who can sit in power, what states can and can’t do under the supremacy clause, disburse funds, etc. In order to truly understand how the constitution can be implicated and interpreted, it is important to understand where it came from, and what Article One of the constitution states about governmental organization, and the Legislative branch.
“The US Constitution’s Article Four defines relationships among the governments regarding the following: recognition of each government’s official acts, how a State treats the citizens of another state, extradition of criminal fugitives, return of slaves, admission of new States, and defense of the country from invasion and domestic violence.” (shestokas)