Kendall v. United States

Appellant
Amos Kendall, U.S. Postmaster General
Appellee
United States
Appellant's Claim
That Kendall should not have to order the Post Office Department to pay certain funds to a firm that did business with them, even though a federal court had ordered him to, if he himself, in his official capacity, did not believe the funds should be awarded.
Chief Lawyers for Appellant
Francis Scott Key; Benjamin F. Butler, U.S. Attorney General
Chief Lawyers for Appellee
Richard S. Coxe, Reverdy Johnson
Justices for the Court
Henry Baldwin, Philip Pendleton Barbour, John Catron, John McKinley, John McLean, Joseph Story, Roger Brooke Taney, Smith Thompson (writing for the Court), James Moore Wayne
Justices Dissenting
None
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
12 March 1838
Decision
That the act Kendall objected to was merely "ministerial" and did not requirejudgment or discretion on his part; therefore, he was obligated to follow the directive of the federal court.
Significance
The decision in Kendall v. United States was a major step in the definition of the powers of the three different branches of government: executive,legislative, and judicial. The Court found that although the president "wasbeyond the reach of any other department" (except if he or she were being impeached), other members of the executive branch were subject to the rulings offederal court in many instances.
The story of Kendall's fight with the government begins as a story of government corruption. Under President Andrew Jackson, the Post Office Department was known for the large amounts of money that frequently changed hands betweenthe department and the big contractors who were hired to transport the mail.Washington became filled with stories of scandals concerning large contractors who kept their lucrative contracts by unfairly fighting off competition andregarding vague contracts that no one could interpret precisely.
Finally, in 1835, Jackson removed the head of the department (the man was appointed to a post overseas) and replaced him with Amos Kendall. Kendall was amajor supporter of Jackson and something of a crusader. He did his best to clean up the department, but he ran into trouble concerning an alleged debt tothe firm of Stockton and Stokes, a firm that carried the mail between Washington, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, and between Washington and Wheeling, Virginia (today West Virginia).
A Carriage and a Pair of Horses
Stockton and Stokes claimed that the department owed them money. Kendall found no evidence of any legitimate debt. Stockton and Stokes made the mistake ofoffering Kendall's wife a carriage and a pair of horses if he allowed the claim. Kendall was incensed. Stockton and Stokes then appealed to Congress. Here the trouble began.
Congress, which is responsible for the appropriation of funds, might have ruled on the claim, but they did not. Instead, they passed an act directing thesolicitor of the treasury to decide the matter. The treasury, of course, wasan entirely different department from the post office. Moreover, Kendall washead of his department, whereas the solicitor of the treasury was only a junior official in the treasury. Kendall was insulted once again.
Kendall also did not like the fact that the solicitor, Virgil Maxcy, was a good friend of the firm in question. Without even asking Kendall, Maxcy not only allowed the original claim, he called for Kendall's department to pay another $40,000. Kendall made his objections known, but he did pay the original claim. He refused, however, to pay the $40,000.
The President Fails to Intervene
Frustrated in their efforts to get money that they regarded as legitimately theirs, Stockton and Stokes went to President Jackson himself. Jackson, however, refused to act. Instead, he referred them back to Congress. The House of Representatives did nothing in response, but the Senate reiterated that Maxcy's recommendation should be followed. In other words, Kendall was supposed topay the $40,000.
Kendall was stubborn, and he believed he was in the right. He refused to pay.So Stockton and Stokes went to the U.S. Circuit Court of the District of Columbia. They asked for a writ of mandamus, an order forcing Kendall toact.
Because the president had failed to take any decisive action in the matter tothis point, and because Kendall, as part of the Cabinet, represented the president, Kendall began to feel concerned. He felt that Jackson's lack of action had shown the executive branch in a bad light. In circuit court he filed anopinion of the president's official lawyer, Attorney General Benjamin F. Butler, arguing that a U.S. circuit court had no power to force a member of theexecutive branch to do anything related to his job.
Stockton and Stokes refused to back down from their claim. The case went to court. Meanwhile, both Kendall and Maxcy turned to the press to argue their points. The case became an 1838 version of a "media circus."
The Separation of Powers
The controversy stemmed from an argument about the separation of powers. TheU.S. Constitution clearly establishes three branches of government: a legislative branch, led by Congress, to make the laws, an executive branch, led by the president, to execute the laws, and a judicial branch, led by the SupremeCourt, to interpret the laws. That way, in theory, no one branch would becometoo powerful.
Kendall's lawyers argued that if a federal court could force a member of theexecutive branch to take a particular action as part of his governmental duties, the court was usurping the power of executive authority. If so, the separation of powers called for in the Constitution would be violated.
Opposing lawyers, hired by Stockton and Stokes, likewise appealed to the separation of powers. But in their opinion, Kendall was the one who was violatingthe separation. Richard S. Coxe, for example, accused Kendall of wanting tobreak down the judicial branch of government, take over the legislative branch of government, destroy the safeguards set up by the Constitution, and makethe executive branch all-powerful.
The arguments also covered the issue of whether the action of paying the $40,000 was merely "ministerial" (routine) or if it was an action that required judgment and discretion. Kendall's lawyers agreed that if the act were ministerial, then the courts could order Kendall to perform it. However, they argued, the act was actually far more than ministerial; it required judgment and discretion. In that sense, Kendall was representing the president. And no courtshould be able to force the president to take a particular governmental action.
Kendall Loses--and Wins
Unfortunately for Kendall, the Supreme Court did not agree with him at all. They found unanimously that the circuit court did indeed have the power to order him to pay the debt. True, the president himself was "beyond the reach ofany other department"--unless Congress should decide to impeach him--but onlythe president had that kind of power.
The Court found that other members of the executive branch might have their duties divided into two parts. One part, true, required judgment and discretion and might be seen as representing the chief executive. But the other part was "subject to the control of the law, and not to the direction of the president." This part of an official's duties was indeed subject to a court's ruling. Therefore, Kendall should pay the money that he had been ordered to pay.
The Court's decision caused a great deal of controversy. Some segments of thepublic and the press applauded the "spirit of independence" shown by the Court. Others held that the Supreme Court had "no right to assume authority overthe executive."
The Kendall story has a fascinating postscript. Although Kendall did go aheadand pay the money as ordered, Stockton and Stokes were still not satisfied.They sued Kendall for the money they had lost by his long delay. By this time, Kendall had left public office and become the campaign manager of Martin Van Buren, who would become America's next President. Van Buren was a Democratrunning against an opponent from the Whig party. A jury of one Democrat and eleven Whigs found against Kendall and ordered him to pay $11,000 in damages.
Kendall was burdened by many debts and refused to pay this one. He said he would rather go to jail than cheat his legitimate creditors by paying anythingto Stockton and Stokes. Finally, former President Jackson intervened. He helped pass a law abolishing imprisonment for debt in the District of Columbia--if the debtor was appealing his debt to a higher court. Then, in 1845, the Supreme Court found in Kendall's favor. They ruled that he did not have to pay damages to Stockton and Stokes because he had not been acting in his private capacity, but rather as a government official. Kendall went on to ask Congressto pay his lawyer's fees and other costs for the damages suit. Congress agreed. Kendall was a victor at last.
Related Cases

• Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).
  
• Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304 (1816).