Today in Supreme Court History: July 10, 1832

7/10/1832: President Jackson vetoes the bill to recharter the Second Bank of the United States. He wrote that the bill was unconstitutional.

President Andrew Jackson

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Turner v. Quarterman, 554 U.S. 933 (decided July 10, 2008): stay of execution denied, as it had been by the Fifth Circuit, but we learn from the Fifth Circuit dissent that defendant’s sole argument — that he was entitled to federally appointed counsel in his clemency proceeding — though foreclosed by Fifth Circuit precedent, had been decided differently by other Circuits and the Supreme Court had just granted certiorari to deal with the split. (In that case, Harbison v. Bell, the Court came down on Mr. Turner’s side, but the decision was rendered on April 1, 2009, some nine months after he was executed by lethal injection.)

[not guilty]

Did the "pro-life" crowd utter a peep of protest?

[Frank Drackman]

Whats to protest? he was already born, hasn't killed anyone since he was executed.

[Dr. Ed 2]

No more than when a criminal is incarcerated (loss of liberty) or fined (loss of property) -- this isn't arbitrary or capricious, the way that an abortion is. (Whom has the fetus murdered?)

[Dan Schiavetta]

I have a Native American friend who, every time she gets a 20 dollar bill, draws an arrow through this guy’s head before she passes it on.

Waiting for Harriet to take over.

[Frank Drackman]

is she a real "Native American"(correct term is American Indian) or a Poke-a-hontas 1/1024th kind?

[John F. Carr]

Your friend may or may not be a criminal.

In days when cash was more popular there was a web site to track movement of bills. You would enter the serial number and you could see where it had been spotted. The creators of the site had a rubber stamp to ink the web site name on the bill to advertise the site. They stopped offering it out of fear that they could be accused of violating a law against defacing currency.

[Mr. Bumble]

Oh good. Now someone will get Trump to autograph a dollar bill and Jack Smith will file new charges.

[Dan Schiavetta]

John:

We knew it was probably against the law. She considered it a form of civil disobedience.

Then again (this was the 1970s) it was not unusual for marks (usually just a tick) to be made on money for one reason or another. I remember passing a dollar bill on which someone had written “I Bless This”. And then there was the marked bill scam from the movie “Paper Moon”.

[Mr. Bumble]

You're probably OK:
Defacement of U.S. currency is regulated by 18 USC 333, which states:

[W]hoever mutilates, cuts, defaces, disfigures, or perforates, or unites or cements together, or does any other thing to any bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt issued by any national banking association, or Federal Reserve bank, or the Federal Reserve System, with intent to render such bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt unfit to be reissued, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both. [Emphasis added]

There’s also a law prohibiting the use of paper money as advertising, 18 USC 475, which states:

[W]hoever . . . writes, prints, or otherwise impresses upon . . . any [coin or currency] of the United States, any business or professional card, notice, or advertisement, or any notice or advertisement whatever, shall be fined under this title. [Emphasis added]

https://www.stampstampede.org/faq/yes-its-legal/

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks.

Not sure if my friend would have welcomed this news. She got a thrill out of breaking the law in such a fashion.

[not guilty]

Would drawing an arrow through Jackson’s head render the bill unfit to be reissued? If not, what facts suggest any intent to do so?

[Drewski]

Nonsense. The bill-trackers gave up because it could be considered advertising, not defacing. Defacing currency is only illegal with intent to defraud.

[Krayt]

Iirc the court (sc?) that defacing money was a crime only if the purpose was to make it unusable. Otherwise it was valid speech.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I believe that defacing US currency is a Federal offense....

[bernard11]

Did you read Bumble's comment above?

[CJColucci]

I’ve read a fair amount about the legal and political issues around the Bank of the United States, but I haven’t found much on the economics of the BOTUS. Was it a good and useful institution? Or was it at least better than the alternatives? Anyone have any recommendations?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Most historians think the lack of a central bank worsened the Panic of 1837. I’m not an economist so I don’t know.

I don't think anyone disputes that in the modern world, the Federal Reserve is a stabilizing force.

[Dilan Esper]

Not just the Panic of 1837. The 19th Century was dotted with long-term, severe recessions, including one that was 20 years long.

No successful developed economy exists that doesn't have a powerful central bank.

[Dan Schiavetta]

My understanding is that the first person to point out and explain the boom-and-bust nature of capitalism was Karl Marx.

[Dilan Esper]

He certainly pointed it out, but actually the advocates of the Bank of the United States understood it as well. Obviously they didn't have the sophisticated models that macroeconomics provides today, but the basic notion of central banking, even in Hamilton's time, recognized the idea of business cycles and advocated using the money supply to stabilize the economy. After the Second Bank was killed, major American financiers (especially, later on, JP Morgan) took on the same role through private transactions.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks.

As I recall, before the Federal Reserve was formed in 1913, Morgan twice saved the financial system from collapse. Of course, it was just lucky that such a farsighted person with the necessary wherewithal was on the scene.

[Mr. Bumble]

You mean an obscenely wealthy capitalist?

[Dilan Esper]

He was obscenely wealthy, but that just makes the point. Basically JP Morgan was able to take advantage of the gross income and wealth inequality of the Gilded Age to save the economy. A central bank is a far superior system.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and of course we no longer have booms and busts.

[Dilan Esper]

They are far, far less severe and less long-lasting than the booms and busts of the 19th Century. The Federal Reserve is one of the greatest success stories of the US government.

[Dr. Ed 2]

If I'm not mistaken, the issue was (a) personal with a man named Biddle, (b) part of the class struggle between the established "deep state" of that era and Team Jackson, and (c) conflict between a singular national bank and local banks -- each of whom issued paper currency.

Remember that "coining money" was restricted to Congress -- but anyone could issue bank notes and most banks did up until about a century ago.

Technically, I don't think we have a singular National bank now -- remember that there are 12 separate Feds -- look at your one dollar bills and see who issued each -- and I think that some (not all) of the combined political/economic power that Jackson feared still doesn't exist.

[bernard11]

I don't know the specifics of the Bank of the US, but central banks are in general a very good idea.

[F.D. Wolf]

If the opinion of the Supreme Court covered the whole ground of this act, it ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented to them for passage or approval as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. The opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the President is independent of both. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/july-10-1832-bank-veto

Jackson's veto message is rightly considered an important American historical document, a shot at the idea of judicial supremacy, though the bulk of it is an attack on the Bank on policy grounds. It is very well written and clearly authored by an attorney schooled in constitutional law. So, who actually wrote it? This is a matter of some debate among historians, and it likely had several contributors, including Jackson himself, but the generally acknowledged author of the bulk of it is Jackson's Attorney General Roger B. Taney, whom, of course, Jackson would later appoint Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

[CJColucci]

Nobody needs an elaborate justification for not exercising a governmental power that the Supreme Court says you have. Nobody ever suggested that the federal government was required to charter a bank. You can decline to exercise a power simply because you think it inexpedient. None of this has any bite unless the Supreme Court says you can't do something.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks.

One assumes he was represented at trial, and that his lawyer let him say these things to rebut premeditation or “malignant heart”.

A clemency hearing of course is a different situation.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Did he plead for mercy because he was an orphan?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Maybe there was strong evidence as to that which had to be blunted.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Feeling nothing after killing his parents is evidence he is a psychopath, pretty much textbook, although there are other things thrown in. Pretty clear evidence of mental illness.

But healthy and well adjusted folk don't kill people. So I say fry him.