Mississippi v. Johnson
Significance, The Case Against Johnson And The Reconstruction Act, The Court Says No, Salmon Portland Chase
Plaintiff
State of Mississippi
Defendants
Andrew Johnson, General Edward O. C. Ord
Plaintiff's Claim
That the Supreme Court should prevent President Andrew Johnson from carrying out the provisions of the Reconstruction Act of 1867.
Chief Lawyers for Plaintiff
W. L. Sharkey, R. J. Walker
Chief Defense Lawyer
Henry Stanberry, U.S. Attorney General
Justices for the Court
Salmon Portland Chase (writing for the Court), Nathan Clifford, David Davis, Stephen Johnson Field, Robert Cooper Grier, Samuel Freeman Miller, Samuel Nelson, Noah Haynes Swayne, James Moore Wayne
Justices Dissenting
None
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
15 April 1867
Decision
Denied plaintiff's claim.
Related Cases
- Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).
- Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866).
- Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982).
Sources
West's Encyclopedia of American Law. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 1998.
Additional topics
- Munn v. Illinois - Setting The Boundary Between State And Federal Regulation, Further Readings
- Minor v. Happersett - Significance, The "new Departure", A Constitutional Approach, All Or Nothing, The Fourteenth Amendment
- Mississippi v. Johnson - Significance
- Mississippi v. Johnson - Further Readings
- Mississippi v. Johnson - The Case Against Johnson And The Reconstruction Act
- Mississippi v. Johnson - The Court Says No
- Mississippi v. Johnson - Salmon Portland Chase
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1833 to 1882