Peter V. Daniel
Peter V. Daniel was a prominent American lawyer and jurist, who began his legal career in 1808 and served in various political roles, including as a member of the Virginia House of Delegates and as lieutenant governor from 1818 to 1835. Appointed as a federal judge by President Andrew Jackson in 1836, he gained further prominence when nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Martin Van Buren in 1841, taking office in January 1842. Daniel was known for his opposition to the recognition of corporate legal rights and for resisting the expansion of federal authority over commerce, advocating instead for strong state power.
He articulated his views in significant court cases, including his majority opinion in West River Bridge Co. v. Dix, which supported state authority over infrastructure. Furthermore, Daniel was a staunch defender of slavery and maintained that states should have the control to regulate it, as evidenced by his agreement with the majority opinion in the landmark case Scott v. Sandford. His judicial philosophy reflected the complexities of his time, navigating between state rights and the expanding role of the federal government.
Subject Terms
Peter V. Daniel
Nominated by: Martin Van Buren
Significance: As a Supreme Court justice, Daniel was a defender of slavery and an opponent of corporations and federal authority.
Daniel began practicing law in 1808, was elected to the Virginia house of delegates in 1809, and served as lieutenant governor from 1818 to 1835. In 1836 he was appointed a federal judge by President Andrew Jackson. On February 27, 1841, he was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Martin Van Buren. He was confirmed by the Senate on March 2 and took office in January of the next year.
At a time when corporations were asserting their legal rights, Daniel believed that the law should not recognize these rights at all. He also opposed expanding admiralty law, which granted the federal government authority over ocean transport, to include commerce on major rivers and lakes.
Although he opposed federal power, Daniel was a strong advocate of state authority. In West River Bridge Co. v. Dix (1848), a case involving the power of a state to purchase ownership of a bridge, he wrote the majority opinion in favor of the state. He was also a strong defender of slavery and its control by the states. In Scott v. Sandford (1857), he agreed with the majority that the federal government had no power to outlaw slavery in new territories.