Cohens v. Virginia

6 Wheat. (19 U.S.) 264 (1821), argued 13 Feb. 1821, decided 3 Mar. 1821 by vote of 6 to 0; Marshall for the Court. Philip and Mendes Cohen sold lottery tickets in Virginia under the authority of an act of Congress for the District of Columbia. The Cohens appealed their conviction for violating the state statute, which had banned such lotteries. Virginia asserted that the Eleventh Amendment precluded the Supreme Court from hearing the case and that section 25 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 did not apply.

The Cohens case reflected the effort by several states, including Virginia, to challenge John Marshall's opinion in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). Marshall seized on Cohens, which some historians believed was contrived, to reemphasize federal judicial power. He asserted that the Constitution made the Union supreme and that the federal judiciary was the ultimate constitutional arbiter. While the states could interpret their own laws, any federal question must ultimately be resolved, as section 25 provided, only by the federal courts. The Eleventh Amendment did not prevent federal courts from deciding properly a legitimate federal question, even where a state was the appellee.

Marshall avoided Virginia noncompliance by holding that the lottery statute applied only in the District of Columbia, but Virginia states' rights advocates nonetheless blasted his judicial nationalism.

See also Judicial Power and Jurisdiction.

— Kermit L. Hall

• 6 Wheat. 264 (1821)
• Vote: 6–0
• For the Court: Marshall

Two brothers, Philip and Mendes Cohen, were charged with violating a Virginia law by selling lottery tickets within the state. They were tried, convicted, and fined by a local court in Norfolk, Virginia. The Cohens appealed the Virginia court decision to the U.S. Supreme Court under Section 25 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which provides for review by the U.S. Supreme Court of decisions by state courts that involve issues of constitutional or federal law.

The Cohen brothers said that their lottery had been incorporated in Washington, D.C., according to terms of an act of Congress. Therefore they concluded that their lottery was conducted properly under federal law and could not be restricted by a state law.

The Issue

Attorneys for the state of Virginia argued that according to the 11th Amendment to the Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court could not have jurisdiction in this case. Furthermore, they held that there were no words in the U.S. Constitution that “set up the federal judiciary above the state judiciary.” Therefore, they said, Section 25 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 could not be used to justify jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in this case. The issue was: Does the U.S. Supreme Court have jurisdiction in cases originating in state courts when these cases involve questions about federal law and the U.S. Constitution? Is the U.S. Supreme Court the final authority in such cases? Did the state of Virginia wrongfully convict the Cohens for violating a state law against lotteries?

Opinion of the Court

Chief Justice John Marshall delivered the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court, which upheld the jurisdiction and authority of the U.S. Supreme Court to review decisions of state courts when they involve issues about federal law or the U.S. Constitution. He wrote eloquently in support of Section 25 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and reaffirmed the Court's decision (written by Justice Joseph Story) in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816).

Marshall also effectively dismissed Virginia's claim that the 11th Amendment precluded the Supreme Court from having jurisdiction in this case. Finally, after establishing the Court's authority and jurisdiction in this case, Marshall ruled against the Cohen brothers and upheld their conviction under Virginia state law.

Significance

Chief Justice Marshall asserted the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution and federal law over state laws that conflicted with them. And he argued compellingly for the ultimate authority of the U.S. Supreme Court over state courts on all questions involving the U.S. Constitution and federal law. These views are no longer controversial, but in Marshall's time they were burning constitutional issues. The chief justice, however, framed and responded to these issues in a timeless fashion, and his decision undergirds our contemporary conceptions of federal-state relations.

See also Federalism; Judicial review; Jurisdiction; Martin v. Hunter's Lessee

Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheaton 264 (1821). The Cohens had been convicted of selling lottery tickets in Virginia, a practice prohibited by state law but allowed under federal law in the District of Columbia. On appeal to the United States Supreme Court, the state asserted its legal sovereignty and denied the federal court's right of review. Invoking the doctrine of national supremacy, Chief Justice John Marshall upheld its appellate jurisdiction over state court judgments in cases where the conviction violated some right under the Constitution or federal laws. This was one of Chief Justice John Marshall's most influential opinions, establishing national authority over the states.

Bibliography

Hall, Kermit L. The Supreme Court and Judicial Review in American History. Washington, D.C.: American Historical Association, 1985.

Luce, W. Ray. Cohens v. Virginia (1821): The Supreme Court and State Rights. New York: Garland, 1990.

—Charles Fairman/A. R.

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)