422) Justice Iredell
would have ruled as Hamilton, Madison, and Marshall would have expected.
With respect to treaties, Supreme Court Justice Iredell
89) Justice Iredell
disagreed with Justice Chase's premise:
Looking back with the benefit of two hundred-plus years of hindsight, the assertions of Justices Wilson and Blair that the scheme was "radically inconsistent with the independence of th[e] judicial power" and of Justice Iredell
that "no decision of any court of the United States can .
507 (1795), Supreme Court Justice Iredell
declared that 'a Court of Admiralty in one nation, can carry into effect the determination of the Court of Admiralty of another.
argued that if Congress or a state legislature "shall pass a law, within the general scope of their constitutional power, the Court cannot pronounce it to be void, merely because it is, in their judgment, contrary to the principles of natural justice.
of North Carolina, who joined the Court in April 1790, traveled around 1800 or 1900 miles on the Southern circuit in 1790 and an additional 1800 miles to get to and from Philadelphia.
, for example, swept the terms of constitutional debate aside, bringing the common law to the fore and reasserting its power for the post-constitutional age.
responded: "The Court cannot pronounce [such an act] to be void, merely because it is, in their judgment, contrary to the principles of natural justice.
58) Justice Iredell
provided the following definition: "[legislatures] shall not pass any ex post facto law; or, in other words, they shall not inflict a punishment for any act, which was innocent at the time it was committed; nor increase the degree of punishment previously denounced for any specific offence.
The Sedition Act: Justice Iredell
defended the Act on the grounds that seditious speech jeopardized the constitutionally established regime of republican government and even the freedom of the press itself.
agreed with his fellow judge, and further argued