Texas Review of Law & Politics, Volume 20, Number 1, Fall 2015 Page: 9
167 p.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Judicial Supremacy Has Its Limits
subjected certain individuals to its penalties of fine and
imprisonment," Jefferson explained in 1819.44 "On coming into
office, I released these individuals by the power of pardon
committed to executive discretion, which could never be more
properly exercised than where citizens were suffering without the
authority of law, or, which was equivalent, under a law
unauthorized by the constitution, and therefore null."45 Even
though the courts and Congress had found the Alien and Sedition
Acts to be constitutional, Jefferson used his power as President to
prevent execution of the law.
Jefferson's decision was rooted in a strict view of the separation
of powers and the right of each branch to interpret the
Constitution for itself. He utterly rejected the notion that the
courts have the last word on the meaning of the founding
document. In a letter to Abigail Adams explaining his actions,
Jefferson asserted that the executive and judiciary are "equally
independent" in reviewing the constitutionality of the laws:
You seem to think it devolved on the judges to decide on the
validity of the sedition law. But nothing in the Constitution has
given them a right to decide for the executive, more than to the
executive to decide for them. Both magistrates are equally
independent in the sphere of action assigned to them.46
While the courts can view a law as constitutional and allow cases to
move forward, the President can hold a different view and refuse to
bring prosecutions against those who violate the law and pardon
those already convicted. In an 1819 letter, Jefferson cited his
reversal of the Sedition Act convictions to show that "each
department is truly independent of the others, and has an equal
right to decide for itself what is the meaning of the constitution in
the cases submitted to its action; and especially, where it is to act
ultimately and without appeal."47 WhileJefferson did not challenge
the Court's right to interpret the Constitution or review the
constitutionality of statutes, he denied that the judiciary's thinking
bound him in the exercise of his own responsibilities.
Jefferson's vision went further. He believed that Presidents ought
44. Thomas Jefferson, To Judge Spencer Roane (Sep. 6, 1819), in 12 THE WORKS OF
THOMASJEFFERSON 135, 138 (Paul L. Ford ed., 1905).
45. Id.
46. Thomas Jefferson, To Mrs. Adams (Sep. 11, 1804), in 4 THE WRITINGS OF THOMAS
JEFFERSON 560, 561 (H. A. Washington ed., D.C., Taylor & Maury 1854).
47. Jefferson, supra note 44, at 137.No. 1
9
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
University of Texas at Austin. School of Law. Texas Review of Law & Politics, Volume 20, Number 1, Fall 2015, periodical, September 2015; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth839390/m1/23/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.