The Great Decision

Jefferson, Adams, Marshall and the Battle for the Supreme Court

By: Cliff Sloan, David McKean

Narrated by: Peter Jay Fernandez

Length: 7 hrs and 56 mins

Publisher's summary

In 1800, the United States teetered on the brink of a second revolution. The presidential election between Adams and Jefferson was a bitterly contested tie, and the government neared collapse. The Supreme Court had no clear purpose or power - no one had even thought to build it a courtroom in the new capital city.

When Adams sought to prolong his policies in defiance of the electorate by packing the courts, the fine words of the new Constitution could do nothing to stop him. It would take a man to make those words good, and America found him in John Marshall.

The Great Decision tells the riveting story of Marshall and of the landmark court case, Marbury v. Madison, through which he empowered the Supreme Court and transformed the idea of the separation of powers into a working blueprint for our modern state.

Rich in atmospheric detail, political intrigue, and fascinating characters, The Great Decision is an illuminating tale of America's formative years and of the evolution of our democracy.

©2009 Cliff Sloan and David McKean (P)2009 Audible, Inc.

Critic reviews

"[T]heir book provides a colorful description of the tumultuous times in which the Court rendered its landmark judgment. And the book's implicit references and comparisons to our own politically divisive times will not be lost on the attentive reader." (The Washington Post)
"In this highly accessible book, the authors skillfully build suspense and tension around an outcome readers may already know." (Booklist)

No longer left wondering "who is Marbury?"

A great history, telling the story not just of the legal case of Marbury v Madison, but setting it in context. It painted a picture of the people, places and politics that wasn't covered nearly to that depth and breadth in my AP US History lessons on the era and case. It delved into the roles and relationships of all of the directly and indirectly involved figures and public officials. It shed a whole new light and perspective on those few years of history for me. I only had trouble a few times keeping track of the narration when it used occasional quotes from letters and other historical records... the unfamiliar style of those documents I'm sure would have been easier understood in written form than audio. Overall a great read, engaging and well narrated.

A Most Pleasant & Enjoyable Surprise

I thought this book would mainly be about the Marbury vs. Madison decision, but it was hardly mentioned until over halfway through the book. However, you should not let that put you off from buying it. This audio book turned out to be a wonderful exposure to part of the late 1700s and early 1800s of the United States. I learned much of the small details about this time period with respect to the federal government, and as to Federalists vs. Republicans. The authors (and the narrator) brought to life what otherwise could have been stuffy recounting of this early period of American history. I found myself looking forward to listening to the book, be it 5 minutes or an hour. I believe that most people interested in this particular period of our history will discover this to be a worthwhile purchase and listen.

Just get it and Listen to It!

For any American History buff, it is a must, A superb description of Marbury v Madison, the issues surrounding the same, and the personages involved. John Marshall towers in early American history, and I hardly knew him at at all. Long enough to learn something from, but short enough not to bog down, Well read. Get it.

How the Court gained its power

The 1800 elections unveiled a schism in the body politic for the first time in U.S. history. The battle of the two party systems begins with this election. In the final days of John Adam’s presidency, he tried to appoint as many Federalist as possible to position established in legislation passed by the outgoing Federalist majority Congress. He had recently appointed John Marshall as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court when John Jay refused to take the job again. A handful of commissions for justice of the peace remained undelivered when incoming Democratic-Republican President Thomas Jefferson took office. Jefferson ordered his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver them. A disgruntled office seeker, William Marbury, sued to have his commission honored.

The book is well-research even including some contemporary newspaper accounts. The book reads like a political thriller. Marbury V Madison is considered the most important legal case in American history. The case established the judiciary as the final arbiter of any conflict between the law and the Constitution. The authors supply Marbury’s historical context and unravels the complex fabric of personalities, politics and law that animated the case. Sloan and McKean spent most of the book on the 1800 election and the thoughts of Adams and Jefferson. I wished they would have spent equal or more time on John Marshall and how he came to his decision. The book suffers from occasionally losing momentum, dragging and poor editing. But overall the book provided a review of the history of the 1800 election, the antagonism between Adams and Jefferson as well as insight into legal history. If one is interested in American history and legal history this is a great book to start with. Peter Jay Fernandez did a good job narrating the book.

The original "activist judge"

John Marshall is widely viewed as the man who established judicial review in the United States. This is an engaging account of the circumstances and politics surrounding Marbury v Madison. Judicial review and the independence of the judiciary are fundamental to the American system; here are the details of how that came to be.

Chief Justice Marshall had a clear grasp of the issues and understood that only a strong supreme court could defend American democracy. We can all be thankful that this strong leader was able to bring the court up to equality with the other two branches of government.

A story that needed telling

Slanted a bit in John Marshall's favor but not overly biased. Gripping story. A good listen

Pretty dry.

Probably great if you are a US History/Government/Supreme Court buff, but I'm not. The historical context stuff was neat though.

I Expected More

This seemed like an "abridged" reading. Chapters were short and leaving me hungry for more information. I also felt the book lacked direction. It took a long time to even get to the Great Decision. I couldn't tell if this was a book about the early Founding Fathers, the debate between Republicans & Federalists, the Court's history or a biography of Marshal. It probably should have been all of the above in a longer book. It is also frustrating when statements are mentioned, both correctly and incorrectly, in different chapters. For example: Marshal was referred to as both the 3rd and 4th Chief Justice & The number of ballots needed in the Jefferson/Burr decision was referred to as both 35 and 36.
Narration was a bit slow, but very clear enjoyable listen.
All in all, I enjoyed the book. A great part of judicial history that has not been given enough attention. Characters were well researched. I like any book that I walk away from learning something.

Trail of Tears

Excellent account of Madison v Marbury. But to leave out Marshall’s role in the Trail of Tears as the next immediate challenge to the Democracy and the SCOTUS, is a glaring omission.

That said, it is incredible to read this book today in light of current politics and world events. The similarities are eerie!

John Marshall & The Supremes

The first case I read for my Constitutional Law class in law school was Marbury v. Madison (1803) 5 U.S. 137, 1 Cranch 137. I was brand new to law school, and the case mystified me. I understood why Marbury v. Madison was crucial to establishing the Judiciary as a co-equal branch of government, along with the Executive and Legislative branches. Despite my love of American History, I lacked specific knowledge of the political history and judicial structure to understand how the case ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Cliff Sloan and David McKean's "The Great Decision: Jefferson, Adams, Marshall and the Battle for the Supreme Court" (2009) gave me the context I was missing.

John Adams, the Federalist second president of the United States, lost a bid for re-election. The winner was a Democratic-Republican, but the electoral college votes were evenly split between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr.

While Jefferson and Burr schemed and plotted, Congress worked to determine who would be the third president. In that confused period of time, Adams made hundreds of Federalist appointments. One of those was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall. Adams also appointed William Marbury as a Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia.

After Jefferson took office, Marbury's commission was never delivered and Marbury filed a writ of mandamus against James Madison, Jefferson's Secretary of State, asking that the Executive Branch be required to appoint him.

"The Great Decision" describes the physical and cultural condition of Washington, DC at the time and the strengths and weaknesses of the men involved. For example, Jefferson had so little regard for the judiciary as a whole and the Supreme Court specifically, he didn't bother to send a lawyer to represent the government. Jefferson also hated his second cousin, Marshall, which contributed to his disdain.

I was fascinated by the "The Great Decision", and it adds an important perspective to the adoption of the constitution as we know it today. That point is often lost among ubiquitous biographies of the founding fathers, although the Courts haven't forgotten it. According to Google Scholar, Marbury v. Madison has been cited by federal courts 24,589 times.

Peter Jay Fernandez narration was good, but don't listen to the last chapter (42 minutes) without a strong cup of coffee. It's the actual decision, and Marshall was establishing another Supreme Court precedent: making even the most exciting decision sound dull and repetitive.

[If you found this review helpful, please let me know by clicking Helpful.]