| Although Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall despised one-another personally and were unrepentant political rivals, those differences enabled Marshall as Chief Justice to set the foundation upon which the modern theory of executive authority has been built. Without Jefferson and the Republicans, Marshall would not have had reason to articulate his view that the powers of the Executive are broader than those expressed in the Constitution. Marshall asserted during the case of Jonathan Robbins that the Executive was the "sole organ" in conducting the foreign affairs of the nation. Congress was swayed by this argument and refused to censure President Adams. More than 170 years later, the United States Supreme Court returned to Marshall's opinions on executive authority as it relates to executing treaty obligations. This time, however, the president's actions were not upheld. Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion in Medellin v. Texas demonstrates that Marshall's views of executive authority, specifically regarding treaty situations and foreign affairs, remain the foundation of executive authority theory, but when applied today, the result aligns more with Jefferson's view of limits on executive authority. |
