Text and History Narratives

The Keystone of the Arch: The Text and History of Article III and the Constitution’s Promise of Access to Courts

When the Constitution was framed, the promise of access to the federal courts was at the heart of a new system of government accountable to the people.

Summary

When the Constitution was framed, the promise of access to the federal courts was at the heart of a new system of government accountable to the people. As John Marshall— soon to become our Nation’s greatest Chief Justice—observed, “[t]o what quarter will you look for protection from an infringement on the Constitution, if you will not give the power to the judiciary? There is no other body that can afford such a protection.” The federal judiciary, with the Supreme Court at its head, would be the “keystone of the arch,” establishing a binding rule of law for the nation. In Article III, the Framers created the federal judiciary as a co-equal branch of government vested with the power of expounding and enforcing the laws in cases and controversies. Today, the Framers’ constitutional vision is in shambles. Over the last several decades, conservative Justices on the Supreme Court have emasculated this fundamental constitutional principle, filling the United States Reports with arcane and impenetrable doctrines that do violence to the rule-of-law values at the Constitution’s core. Armed with this history, progressives have a chance to restore basic constitutional first principles that give Americans their day in court to redress legal wrongs and prevent abuse of power by the government. The story laid out in this Narrative shows why this is what the Constitution’s text and history requires.

CAC released The Keystone of the Arch at an event hosted at Georgetown Law School’s Supreme Court Institute on November 3, 2016.

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
March 23, 2020

RELEASE: Reaction to Court’s Ruling in Allen v. Cooper

WASHINGTON – On news this morning of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Allen v. Cooper,...
By: David H. Gans, Dayna Zolle
Civil and Human Rights
March 23, 2020

RELEASE: CAC Reacts to Court’s Discrimination Ruling

“Racial discrimination can infect the contract formation process, and that isn’t altered simply because those...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra
Civil and Human Rights
March 4, 2020

RELEASE: Chief Justice Roberts Could Determine Fate Of Abortion Law

“During yesterday’s oral argument in the CFPB case, Chief Justice Roberts suggested that the Court’s...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
January 20, 2020

OP-ED: To fulfill Martin Luther King’s Jr’s dream, we must address police racism and brutality

Sacramento Bee (McClatchy News Service)
More than a half-century after Dr. King’s death, discriminatory policing persists. Racial profiling, time and...
By: David H. Gans
Civil and Human Rights
December 2, 2019

Abortion-Rights Groups Weigh in on SCOTUS Privileges Fight

Bloomberg Law
Admitting privileges law imposes significant burdens Provides no benefits, briefs say
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Russo

In June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Russo, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Fifth Circuit’s decision to uphold Louisiana’s Act 620, a law which requires physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at...