Mississippi v. Johnson - Significance, The Case Against Johnson And The Reconstruction Act, The Court Says No, Salmon Portland Chase

Mississippi v. Johnson - Significance

The Court refused to limit a president's power to carry out the laws passed by Congress, keeping the separation of powers intact. By not ruling on the Reconstruction Act, the Court let stand the voting rights given to newly freed slaves. The ruling also helped define the executive's immunity from lawsuits designed to limit its political duties. Before Mississippi v. Johnson, an acting president ha…

Mississippi v. Johnson - Further Readings

Mississippi v. Johnson - The Case Against Johnson And The Reconstruction Act

In their motion to the Court, attorneys W. L Sharkey and R. J. Walker attacked the bill's intent. "It annuls and abrogates the state government and state constitutions, and substitutes a mere military power." The federal government had already gotten into constitutional trouble using military authority in civil matters. In 1866, the Court ruled in Ex Parte Milligan that the government could not de…

Mississippi v. Johnson - The Court Says No

The Supreme Court denied the motion to consider the permanent injunction against the Reconstruction Act. The Court noted that bringing suit against a sitting president was unprecedented, and that was held against the plaintiffs. But the Court also relied on specific points of law in its decision. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Chase first looked at the issue of ministerial versus political d…

Mississippi v. Johnson - Salmon Portland Chase

Salmon Portland Chase (1808-73), sixth chief justice of the Supreme Court, served on the Court at the height of the Reconstruction Era, from 1864 to 1873. He presided over pivotal cases such as Mississippi v. Johnson (1866), Ex Parte Milligan (1866), the Test-Oath Cases (1867), and the Slaughterhouse Cases (1873). An opponent of slavery, Chase gained a reputation as a defender of runaway slaves in…