United State Vs Aaron Burr Essay

The American Supreme Court has been in place ever since the Judiciary Act of 1789. Since then, a number of important precedential cases have been tackled by the judges of the court. One of these aforementioned cases is that of 1807’s United State v. Aaron Burr, in which the fledgling court prosecuted Aaron Burr on account of treason.
Initially, Aaron Burr served as the vice president under Thomas Jefferson from 1801-1805. During Jefferson’s second term, Burr was replaced. Burr left his term as vice president with less than honorable and patriotic intentions; in an act of pure pettiness and self-interest, Burr sided with a group of radical Federalists and advocated the secession of New England and New York. Hamilton immediately informed Jefferson of Burr’s conspiracy which prompted Burr to challenge Hamilton to a (technically illegal) duel. The moment that Burr accidentally shot and killed Alexander Hamilton was the pivotal moment where Burr essentially committed political suicide and tarnished his reputation. Subsequent to this, he then set his
sights on the American west. Burr first approached Herman Blennerhassett on Blennerhassett Island, but a year later met with General James Wilkinson of Louisiana. He persuaded Wilkinson to assist him in invading Spanish territory to separate and expand the west, which he would then rule. Again, Jefferson was clued into Burr’s plot and intervened in the fall of 1806 by arresting Burr at the would-be rendezvous spot at Natchez if Wilkinson hadn’t fled to New Orleans.
Burr was brought to Virginia where the presiding judge in his case was Chief Justice John Marshall. Burr was being tried for both treason and high misdemeanors. As it happens, Jefferson strongly pushed for the court to find Burr guilty of treason. He even went so far as to offer amnesty to any co-conspirators who were willing to testify against Burr. However, the case did not sit right with the court for two reasons. Firstly, the accusations brought against Burr by Jefferson and D.A. George Hay were merely alleged rather than concrete evidence. Moreover, General Wilkinson was the only person to testify against Burr. After a 25 minute deliberation, Marshall’s final verdict on the matter, much to the chagrin of Jefferson, was that Burr had to be acquitted because “a guilty verdict required the proof of overt acts of treason, not merely treasonous intentions.” (Kennedy & Cohen, 215) In regards to the ruling, Jefferson, ever the sore loser, was quoted saying, "It now appears we have no law but the will of the judge." Subsequent to the trial, Burr—who clearly didn’t learn his lesson the first two times—fled to Europe to appeal to Napoleon and Britain to obtain their aid in attacking America, but his third plot never came to fruition.
There are a few reasons as to why United States v.
Aaron Burr is a notable case in America’s judicial history. One such reason is, as The American Pageant claims on page 215, “Burr’s insurrectionary brashness demonstrated that it was one thing for the United States to purchase large expanses of western territory but quite another for it to govern them effectively.” Plainly stated, this means that the United States could acquire as much land as they pleased, but actually ruling it was an entirely different matter. If Burr’s numerous insurrectional schemes had actually succeeded, the results could have been potentially catastrophic for the relatively new nation. Burr, however, never came to regret his actions. Upon hearing about the revolution in Texas four years later, Burr proclaimed to a friend “There! You see? I was right! I was only thirty years too soon. What was treason in me thirty years ago, is patriotism
now." Ergo, United States v. Aaron Burr was an important court case occurring in the year of 1807. The Burr Conspiracies reveal Aaron Burr’s fall from political prestige, but most importantly put the United State’s ability to govern its land into perspective.