Cohens v. Virginia

Tue, 13 Feb 1821 13:00:00 +0000

Location

Elizabeth River Parish (now site of Norfolk Naval Station)

9079 Hampton Blvd Norfolk VA 23505

Norfolk, VA 23505

United States

36° 55' 55.2" N, 76° 17' 37.4172" W

See map: Google Maps

Case Basics

Petitioner

Cohens

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Virginia

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Marshall Court (1812-1823)

Decided By

Marshall Court (1812-1823)

Opinion

19 U.S. 264 (1821)

Argued

Tuesday, February 13, 1821

Decided

Saturday, March 3, 1821

Facts of the Case

An act of Congress authorized the operation of a lottery in the District of Columbia. The Cohen brothers proceeded to sell D.C. lottery tickets in the state of Virginia, violating state law. State authorities tried and convicted the Cohens, and then declared themselves to be the final arbiters of disputes between the states and the national government.

Question

Did the Supreme Court have the power under the Constitution to review the Virginia Supreme Court's ruling?

Conclusion

In a unanimous decision, the Court held that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to review state criminal proceedings. Chief Justice Marshall wrote that the Court was bound to hear all cases that involved constitutional questions, and that this jurisdiction was not dependent on the identity of the parties in the cases. Marshall argued that state laws and constitutions, when repugnant to the Constitution and federal laws, were "absolutely void." After establishing the Court's jurisdiction, Marshall declared the lottery ordinance a local matter and concluded that the Virginia court was correct to fine the Cohens brothers for violating Virginia law.

Anderson v. Dunn

Tue, 20 Feb 1821 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Petitioner

Anderson

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Dunn

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Marshall Court (1812-1823)

Decided By

Marshall Court (1812-1823)

Opinion

19 U.S. 204 (1821)

Argued

Tuesday, February 20, 1821

Decided

Friday, March 2, 1821

Facts of the Case

Anderson attempted to bribe a member of Congress to receive favorable treatment from the government. The House order its sergeant-at-arms (Dunn) to arrest Anderson and bring him to the House where he was reprimanded by the Speaker for his contempt of Congress. Anderson then brought an action against Dunn for assault and battery and false imprisonment, claiming that the Constitution did not vest in Congress the power to punish for contempt.

Question

Does the Congress have the power to punish nonmembers for contempt?

Conclusion

Yes. Though the contempt power will not be found in the Constitution in plain terms, necessity compels it. The power is inherent in the structure and purpose of Congress. The absence of such power would lead to a total loss of power, exposing the Congress "to every indignity."

Cases - 1821 term

Cohens v. Virginia

Location

Anderson v. Dunn