In 1874, the U.S. government created the United States Reports, and retroactively numbered older privately published case reports as part of the new series. As a result, cases appearing in volumes 1–90 of U.S. Reports have dual citation forms; one for the volume number of U.S. Reports, and one for the volume number of the reports named for the relevant reporter of decisions (these are called "nominative reports").
Henry Wheaton
Starting with the 14th volume of U.S. Reports, the Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States was Henry Wheaton. Wheaton was Reporter of Decisions from 1816 to 1827, covering volumes 14 through 25 of United States Reports which correspond to volumes 1 through 12 of his Wheaton's Reports. As such, the dual form of citation to, for example, Hopkins v. Lee is 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 109 (1821).
Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.)
The Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).[2] Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice).
When the cases in 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) were decided, the Court comprised these seven justices:
Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 (1821), is a landmark case by the Supreme Court of the United States that is most notable for the Court's assertion of its power to review state supreme court decisions in criminal law matters when the defendant claims that their constitutional rights have been violated. The Court had previously asserted a similar jurisdiction over civil cases involving U.S. parties. The main issue in the case was the preliminary issue of whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal in a criminal case decided by the courts of Virginia. Virginia argued that the U.S. Constitution does not give the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over criminal judgments by state courts. Virginia also argued that the U.S. Constitution does not give the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over cases in which a state is a party. In effect, Virginia argued that its decision was final and could not be reviewed by the federal courts even though the decision involved the interpretation and application of an act of Congress. The Supreme Court ruled, however, that unless state court decisions involving federal law could be reviewed by federal courts, there would be as many interpretations of federal law as there are states.
Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.
Bluebook citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.
”C.C.D.” = United States Circuit Court for the District of . . .
e.g.,”C.C.D.N.J.” = United States Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey
”D.” = United States District Court for the District of . . .
.jpg)
