John Marshall,McCulloch v. Maryland,and the Concept of Constitutional Sovereignty

Scholars have long debated John Marshall's intent in his famous opinion in the case of McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). Despite long-standing disagreement concerning the character of Marshall's nationalism and federalism, interpretations of the opinion typically rely on an incomplete picture of the case. This analysis revisits McCulloch to illustrate his support for national and state sovereignty as defined in the Constitution. It then moves beyond the opinion itself to examine Marshall's defense of McCulloch in a series of newspaper essays he authored in the aftermath of the case. Situated alongside the McCulloch opinion, these essays show that Marshall was as much concerned with defending the sovereignty of the Constitution as he was with adjudicating political authority between national and state governments.     

The Dissents of John Marshall Harlan I

I want to start by offering you two quotations. Both are from Harlan's famous dissent from Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, when the rest of the Justices held that it was constitutional to segregate people according to their race. The first quotation is famous; the second is not well-known—in fact, some of you may have never heard it before. Here is the first quotation:     

The Civil War Reminiscences of John Marshall Harlan

Towards the end of his life, John Marshall Harlan wrote a series of essays about various events of his life. Collected together, the documents form the closest thing to an autobiography Harlan was to write. Most of the documents concern Harlan's experiences in the Civil War, and some of them repeat the same stories. Cited often in biographies and articles about Harlan, they have never been published before. The three printed here were chosen not only for their individual interest, but also because, taken together, they form a nearly complete account of Harlan's wartime experiences.     

The Judicial and Ancient Game: James Wilson,John Marshall Harlan,and the Beginnings of Golf at the Supreme Court

Golf has a long history at the Supreme Court simply as an entertaining pastime for some of its members. Yet the Justices' interest in the sport can also be viewed as a reflection of the evolving work and culture of the institution and of the nation it serves. This article revisits a few early developments involving the first golfer on the Court (Justice James Wilson), the first golf enthusiast (the first Justice John Marshall Harlan), and the first golfing majority (October Term 1906).