Leadership waning: John Marshall, Barron v. Baltimore, and the decline of Justice Marshall's social power and influence

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall was a vibrant, charismatic leader who demonstrated the ability to unite a diverse Court over his many long years of service. In great cases such as McCulloch v. Maryland and Cohens v. Virginia, Marshall led the Court to defend a strong federal government against those who believed strength should reside with the states. His precedent-setting opinions established the Supreme Court as final arbiter in all constitutional cases and determined the constitutional organization of the United States. In the final years of his tenure, though, Marshall altered his longstanding campaign for strong federal jurisdiction in favor of state jurisdiction with his opinion in Barron v. Baltimore.;This dissertation contends that this alteration in position signaled a change in Marshall's leadership position and illustrates his attempt to preserve that leadership, that Marshall sacrificed his political support for a strong federal government in order to perpetuate the perception of his continuing leadership of the Supreme Court. This study examines Marshall's history of leadership and the changes that impacted that leadership near the end of his life. Additionally, it examines his federalism in order to establish the aberration of Barron v. Baltimore. The personal and professional changes in his life near its end were delineated as they relate to his state of mind and possible impact on the Barron opinion. The dissertation concludes that Marshall did indeed alter his federalist stance with the Barron case, and that at a time when his leadership of the Court was waning, thus implying a connection between the two events. The impact of the loss of leadership on a man in the last years of his life, compounded by a comprehension of the loss of his federalist legacy on the Court and in the nation, led Marshall to join the states' rights majority in Barron v. City of Baltimore and write an opinion contradictory to his prior thirty-two years of work.;Chapter 1 (Introduction) presents the basis for examining Marshall's leadership on the Supreme Court.;Chapter 2 (Leadership Power and Influence) examines a definition of leadership based on current and historic leadership theories. It focuses specifically on the leadership theories of John French and Bertram Raven, based on social power and influence and their five power bases.;Chapter 3 (Leadership in the Life of John Marshall) examines the life of Marshall and the many examples of leadership displayed by the Chief Justice. It examines not only his early life, but also his leadership on the Supreme Court.;Chapter 4 (Federal Question Cases) examines McCulloch v. Maryland , Cohens v. Virginia, and the Fairfax cases in order to understand Justice Marshall's beliefs concerning federal jurisdiction. This lays a foundation to which Barron v. Baltimore is compared.;Chapter 5 (The Waning Years and Barron v. Baltimore) first examines the personal and public life of Marshall during this turbulent period in his life. It then looks closely at Barron v. Baltimore and compares and contrasts it with the earlier federal question cases.;Chapter 6 (Analysis of John Marshall's Leadership) compares the leadership of Marshall from the earlier years in his tenure to the time of the Barron case. Taking the comparison of cases in chapter 5 and this comparison of leadership, the chapter 6 determines whether the thesis has been proven.