Introduction
The current U.S. Constitution is one of the oldest in the world. It reflects the fundamental ideas of federalism, separation of powers, the system of checks and balances, and judicial constitutional control, which formed the basis of the state system and the legal and economic systems of the USA. However, for a long time in the global and domestic legal literature, the issue of the role of the Supreme Court in U.S. economic issues has been viewed in a very biased and prejudiced manner. However, high-profile U.S. Supreme Court decisions have underscored the role and importance of the Constitution and underpinned many economic tendencies.
Discussion
The first example is Marbury v. Madison, often called the most critical case in Supreme Court history. This case has an indirect impact on the economic system. Still, it introduced the principle of judicial review and the supreme power of the Court to determine the constitutionality of acts. The case arose from a political controversy after the 1800 presidential election in which Democrat-Republican Thomas Jefferson defeated then-Federalist John Adams for the presidency (Butts, 2019). The new Secretary of State in President Jefferson’s Administration, James Madison, refused to serve papers of appointment because the new Administration was outraged that the Federalists had attempted to infiltrate members of their party into the judicial branch.
The decision in Marbury v. Madison (1803) was a turning point in judicial expansion and the Court’s shift to a vigorous defense of federalism. Although, in this case, Marshall pragmatically avoided a confrontation with the Administration, and the Administration formally prevailed by not granting a federalist patent to Marbury, Marshall secured the power of constitutional review for the Court (Butts, 2019). The decision emphasizes the supreme legal force of the Constitution over common law, which undoubtedly affects the nature of the resolution of any economic disputes or the validity of regulations concerning all spheres, including economics.
Another U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo vs. New London (2005) addressed the right of the state to compulsorily alienate land owned by a private person to another private person to ensure future economic development. By a five to four vote, the justices found that the common good of a community that would benefit from successful economic activity allowed a private redevelopment plan to be considered a public need (Kemper, 2019). After obtaining a court-ordered tract of land, the private developer could not raise the financial resources for his project and had to leave the land vacant.
The case demonstrates that the economic reform movement, political solutions, and legal procedures complement each other. The failure of the U.S. Supreme Court to protect property rights has led to a corresponding reaction from the public and state legislators (Kemper, 2019). Thus, human rights activists are flexible and choose the most beneficial strategy in the current situation. Having analyzed the legislative innovations following the Kelo vs. New London decision, one can conclude that many of them were carried out not to protect private property but in the interests of developers.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that Marbury v. Madison is a fundamental case in establishing the Constitution’s supremacy. It, in turn, has led to the necessity for the compulsory adaptation of economic norms to the general laws of the country and, thereby, to the improvement of economic relations. At the same time, Kelo vs. New London, despite its narrow focus on property rights, is a case that regulates the question of public use, which is an essential step in promoting the general purpose.
References
Butts, D. R. (2019). A theoretic analysis of Marbury v. Madison: The origins of judicial review. James Blair Historical Review, 9(2), 2.
Kemper, E. (2019). Private use of eminent domain. FAU Undergraduate Law Journal, 9(4), 114-114.