Supreme Court of the United States · 1812 · Constitutional Law
Constitutional LawFederal Courtsfederal jurisdictioninferior federal courtscommon law crimescriminal jurisdictionArticle IIIstatutory authorization
Facts
The case involved an asserted criminal prosecution in a United States Circuit Court based on common-law jurisdiction, specifically in a case of libel. The Court treated the matter broadly as presenting whether federal circuit courts may exercise common-law criminal jurisdiction at all when no statute grants it. The opinion states that such jurisdiction had not been asserted in other cases for many years and that public and professional opinion had generally settled against it. No legislative act had conferred the jurisdiction claimed here.
Issue
Can the United States Circuit Courts exercise common-law jurisdiction in criminal cases when Congress has not conferred that jurisdiction by statute? More specifically, may a federal circuit court hear a criminal libel prosecution solely by virtue of common-law authority?
Rule
Except for the Supreme Court's constitutionally derived jurisdiction, federal courts created by Congress have only the jurisdiction Congress confers. Federal criminal jurisdiction does not arise by implication from the mere creation of inferior federal courts; before conduct may be prosecuted as a federal crime, the legislative authority of the Union must make the act a crime, affix a punishment, and declare the court having jurisdiction over the offense.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
In Portland, Maine, federal prosecutors charge Nora Bell in a federal district court with "publicly defaming the national government," relying only on inherited common-law principles. Congress has never enacted a statute defining that conduct as a federal offense or assigning jurisdiction over it to any federal court.
Should the federal district court hear the prosecution?
Explanation. The majority rule is that inferior federal courts possess only the jurisdiction Congress confers. A federal criminal prosecution cannot rest on common law alone. Before such a case may proceed, Congress must make the conduct criminal, affix a punishment, and declare the court with jurisdiction. The defect is not merely that defamation is often governed by state law; it is that no legislative act created this federal crime or gave the inferior federal court authority to hear it. (Derived from United States v. Hudson and Goodwin (1812).)