''United States v. Hudson and Goodwin'', 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 32 (1812), was a case in which the

United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that turn on question ...

held that

Congress A congress is a formal meeting of the representatives of different countries, constituent states, organizations, trade unions, political parties, or other groups. The term originated in Late Middle English to denote an encounter (meeting of ...

must first enact a constitutional law criminalizing an activity, attach a penalty, and give the federal courts

jurisdiction Jurisdiction (from Latin 'law' and 'speech' or 'declaration') is the legal term for the legal authority granted to a legal entity to enact justice. In federations like the United States, the concept of jurisdiction applies at multiple level ...

over the offense in order for the court to render a conviction. In other words, there is no federal common law of crimes.

Facts

Barzillai Hudson and George Goodwin, the

defendant In court proceedings, a defendant is a person or object who is the party either accused of committing a crime in criminal prosecution or against whom some type of civil relief is being sought in a civil case. Terminology varies from one juris ...

s in the case, were charged with a

libel Defamation is a communication that injures a third party's reputation and causes a legally redressable injury. The precise legal definition of defamation varies from country to country. It is not necessarily restricted to making assertions ...

on the President and Congress, and of having accused them of secretly voting to give

Napoleon Bonaparte Napoleon Bonaparte (born Napoleone di Buonaparte; 15 August 1769 – 5 May 1821), later known by his regnal name Napoleon I, was a French general and statesman who rose to prominence during the French Revolution and led Military career ...

$2 million to make a treaty with

Spain Spain, or the Kingdom of Spain, is a country in Southern Europe, Southern and Western Europe with territories in North Africa. Featuring the Punta de Tarifa, southernmost point of continental Europe, it is the largest country in Southern Eur ...

. The circuit court was divided on whether it could exercise

common law Common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law primarily developed through judicial decisions rather than statutes. Although common law may incorporate certain statutes, it is largely based on prece ...

jurisdiction over such cases.

Decision

Justice William Johnson, Jr. delivered the opinion of the Court. He first explained that the federal government is one of limited powers, as set forth in the

Constitution A constitution is the aggregate of fundamental principles or established precedents that constitute the legal basis of a polity, organization or other type of entity, and commonly determines how that entity is to be governed. When these pri ...

. Furthermore, only the jurisdiction of the

Supreme Court In most legal jurisdictions, a supreme court, also known as a court of last resort, apex court, high (or final) court of appeal, and court of final appeal, is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts. Broadly speaking, the decisions of ...

was explicitly defined in Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Since the lower federal courts were created by Congress with the

Judiciary Act of 1789 The Judiciary Act of 1789 (ch. 20, ) was a United States federal statute enacted on September 24, 1789, during the first session of the First United States Congress. It established the federal judiciary of the United States. Article Three of th ...

, their jurisdiction had to be defined by Congress. Therefore, the Court reasoned that since Congress has the power to create such courts, the principles of limited government militate in favor of limiting their jurisdiction to specific acts specified by Congress. The Court held, "The legislative authority of the Union must first make an act a crime, affix a punishment to it, and declare the Court that shall have jurisdiction of the offence." In dicta, he also mentioned an exception to the general rule. Courts have some implied powers, such as punishing litigants for contumacy (

contempt of court Contempt of court, often referred to simply as "contempt", is the crime of being disobedient to or disrespectful toward a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice, and dignity of the co ...

) and enforcing court orders.

Impact

The case effectively closed the door on the lower federal courts' powers to convict defendants for common law crimes and mandated Congress to define criminal jurisdiction specifically, through

legislation Legislation is the process or result of enrolling, enacting, or promulgating laws by a legislature, parliament, or analogous governing body. Before an item of legislation becomes law it may be known as a bill, and may be broadly referred ...

Notes and references

*Gary D. Rowe, ''The Sound of Silence'': United States v. Hudson & Goodwin, ''the Jeffersonian Ascendancy, and the Abolition of Federal Common Law Crimes'', 101 919 (1992).

External links

*
Page from History of the U.S. Supreme Court website
explaining the background and context of the case (scroll down to find this case). {{USArticleIII 1812 in United States case law United States Constitution Article Three case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Marshall Court United States separation of powers case law Federal common law case law Criminal cases in the Marshall Court

Facts

Decision

Impact

See also

Notes and references

External links