The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon & Others was a landmark Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review in the United States. The case involved a dispute between two parties over ownership of a French ship, which had been seized by American authorities during the Napoleonic Wars and sold to an American citizen. The original owner sued for reparations, claiming that his property had been taken without due process of law. In its ruling, the Supreme Court held that federal courts have authority to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional if they violate fundamental principles or conflict with other laws already on the books. This decision marked an important step forward in establishing checks and balances within our government system and protecting individual rights from arbitrary governmental action.

The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon & Others was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1812 that dealt with whether or not a foreign nation had jurisdiction over an American vessel on the high seas. The majority opinion of Chief Justice Marshall held that such jurisdiction did exist, and thus the French government could rightfully seize and condemn vessels belonging to citizens of other nations without violating international law. However, Justice Johnson dissented from this ruling, arguing that no foreign power should have authority over ships owned by citizens of another country while they are outside their own territorial waters. He argued further that any attempt to exercise such control would be considered an act of war against the nation whose vessels were seized and condemned. As he put it: "If France has a right to visit our vessels upon the ocean for purposes hostile to us, she may send her cruisers into every sea; she may take possession of our commerce wherever found; she may subject it at discretion."