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
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. Gee

In June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Gee, 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...
Civil and Human Rights
November 7, 2019

Appeals court says Charlottesville lawsuit against InfoWars can continue

The Daily Progress
A defamation lawsuit against InfoWars and other far-right blogs will move forward after the U.S....
Civil and Human Rights
November 6, 2019

RELEASE: Fourth Circuit Denies Alex Jones’s Appeal: Gilmore Lawsuit Proceeds to Discovery

Brennan Gilmore was subjected to false and defamatory conspiracy theories by InfoWars’ Alex Jones and...
By: Brianne J. Gorod
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American–Owned Media and Entertainment Studios Networks, Inc.

In Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American–Owned Media and Entertainment Studios Networks, Inc., the Supreme Court is considering whether 42 U.S.C. § 1981—which guarantees all persons, regardless of race, the same right to make...
Civil and Human Rights
August 14, 2019

Copyright Cavalry Supports Pirate Ship Photog At High Court

Law360
A slew of high-profile groups have jumped into a U.S. Supreme Court case over whether...