《开端:最初的三位首席大法官

IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 Social Sciences University of Pennsylvania Law Review Pub Date : 2006-06-01 DOI:10.2307/40041343
N. Wexler
{"title":"《开端:最初的三位首席大法官","authors":"N. Wexler","doi":"10.2307/40041343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It comes as a surprise to many—including a number of lawyers and law students—to learn that John Marshall was not in fact the country’s first Chief Justice, but rather its fourth (or, according to some recent scholarship, its fifth). Before there was Marshall, there were John Jay, John Rutledge (briefly), possibly William Cushing (even more briefly), and Oliver Ellsworth. While legal historians may be familiar with these nonhousehold names, all too often when these men, and the Court over which they presided from 1789 to 1800, do receive mention, it is only to be dismissed as inferior to what immediately followed. As Robert McCloskey aptly put it in The American Supreme Court, “[t]he great shadow of John Marshall . . . falls across our understanding of that first decade; and it has therefore the quality of a play’s opening moments with minor characters exchanging trivialities while they and the audience await the appearance of the star.” In the last ten years, scholars have begun to focus more attention on the preMarshall Court, but a certain derogatory attitude persists. One re-","PeriodicalId":48012,"journal":{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","volume":"154 1","pages":"1373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2006-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40041343","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In the Beginning: The First Three Chief Justices\",\"authors\":\"N. Wexler\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/40041343\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It comes as a surprise to many—including a number of lawyers and law students—to learn that John Marshall was not in fact the country’s first Chief Justice, but rather its fourth (or, according to some recent scholarship, its fifth). Before there was Marshall, there were John Jay, John Rutledge (briefly), possibly William Cushing (even more briefly), and Oliver Ellsworth. While legal historians may be familiar with these nonhousehold names, all too often when these men, and the Court over which they presided from 1789 to 1800, do receive mention, it is only to be dismissed as inferior to what immediately followed. As Robert McCloskey aptly put it in The American Supreme Court, “[t]he great shadow of John Marshall . . . falls across our understanding of that first decade; and it has therefore the quality of a play’s opening moments with minor characters exchanging trivialities while they and the audience await the appearance of the star.” In the last ten years, scholars have begun to focus more attention on the preMarshall Court, but a certain derogatory attitude persists. One re-\",\"PeriodicalId\":48012,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Pennsylvania Law Review\",\"volume\":\"154 1\",\"pages\":\"1373\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40041343\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Pennsylvania Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/40041343\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40041343","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

很多人——包括一些律师和法律系学生——都很惊讶地发现,约翰·马歇尔实际上并不是美国第一位首席大法官,而是第四任(或者,根据最近的一些学术研究,是第五任)。在马歇尔之前,有约翰·杰伊、约翰·拉特利奇(短暂地),可能还有威廉·库欣(更短暂地)和奥利弗·埃尔斯沃思。虽然法律历史学家可能对这些不为人知的名字很熟悉,但当这些人以及他们在1789年至1800年期间主持的最高法院被提及时,往往只会被视为不如紧随其后的人而不予理睬。正如罗伯特·麦克洛斯基在《美国最高法院》中恰如其分地指出的那样,“约翰·马歇尔的巨大阴影……不符合我们对第一个十年的理解;因此,它具有戏剧开场时刻的品质,在他们和观众等待明星出现的同时,次要人物交换琐事。”近十年来,学者们开始把更多的注意力集中在马歇尔前法院上,但某种贬损的态度仍然存在。一个重新
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
In the Beginning: The First Three Chief Justices
It comes as a surprise to many—including a number of lawyers and law students—to learn that John Marshall was not in fact the country’s first Chief Justice, but rather its fourth (or, according to some recent scholarship, its fifth). Before there was Marshall, there were John Jay, John Rutledge (briefly), possibly William Cushing (even more briefly), and Oliver Ellsworth. While legal historians may be familiar with these nonhousehold names, all too often when these men, and the Court over which they presided from 1789 to 1800, do receive mention, it is only to be dismissed as inferior to what immediately followed. As Robert McCloskey aptly put it in The American Supreme Court, “[t]he great shadow of John Marshall . . . falls across our understanding of that first decade; and it has therefore the quality of a play’s opening moments with minor characters exchanging trivialities while they and the audience await the appearance of the star.” In the last ten years, scholars have begun to focus more attention on the preMarshall Court, but a certain derogatory attitude persists. One re-
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Ultrastructural and Molecular Development of the Myotendinous Junction Triggered by Stretching Prior to Resistance Exercise. The Specification Power Cross-national analysis about the difference of histopathological management in Tis and T1 colorectal cancer between Japan and Korea. Law, Virtual Reality, and Augmented Reality Data-Driven Originalism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1