Case Names / Rules Flashcards Preview

Nippon (Constitutional Law) > Case Names / Rules > Flashcards

Flashcards in Case Names / Rules Deck (26)
Loading flashcards...

Marbury v. Madison

Facts: P was supposed to be a judge but commission was never delivered. New admin said that no delivery = not valid

Judicial Review – SCOTUS has the duty and power to strike down laws enacted by Congress that have violated the Constitution


Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee

Facts: VA Supreme Court ruled that SCOTUS’ appellate jurisdiction was unconstitutional because the issue in the case was over state law

SCOTUS has appellate review over lower state and federal courts decisions


Ex parte McCardle

Facts: P was arrested for writing critical editorials and petitioned SCOTUS for habeas corpus. Congress issued a statute which repealed SCOTUS’ appellate review of writ of habeas corpus

Congress has the power to take away SCOTUS’ appellate jurisdiction


Baker v. Carr

Facts: D brought suit challenging the constitutionality of legislative apportionment schemes

An apportionment case may be reviewed on 14th amendment grounds, so long as these grounds are independent from political question elements


Goldwater v. Carter

Facts: President Carter wanted to recognize PRC and withdraw from a treaty recognizing Taiwan

President has the authority to repeal a treaty without Congress’ involvement


Nixon V. United States

Facts: Judge was convicted of crimes but refused to resign as Senate didn’t “try” his case correctly

Impeachment is a non-justiciable political question.


Rescue Army v. Municipal Court

Facts: None

Judicial discretion – even if a case meets all the factors, court doesn’t have to hear a case.


Muskrat v. US

Facts: Congress passed statute which enabled Indians to bring suit against US to determine constitutionality of a law allocating tribal lands

Federal courts cannot issue advisory opinions


Frothingham v. Mellon

Facts: P claimed that taxes were increased which would take away her property without due process

People do not have standing simply because they are taxpayers


MA v. Mellon

Facts: MA claimed that Maternity Act violated the 10th amendment

A state cannot generally sue on behalf of their citizens in their relations with the federal government


Allen v. Wright

Facts: Black parents sued IRS re. discriminatory private schools receiving tax exempt status

P must allege a harm directly traceable to specific action on the part of D


Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife

Facts: Animal rights group was suing gov agency re. funding of projects affecting endangered species

Injury must be “actual or imminent” not speculative


Raines v. Byrd

Facts: Congress members unsuccessfully voted against a bill allowing line-item vetoes by President

Individual members of Congress do not automatically have standing to litigate the constitutionality of laws affecting Congress as a whole


DeFunis v. Odegaard

Facts: law student claimed that because of 14th amendment violation he didn’t get into law school

Mootness - a case is moot if events occurring after the filing have deprived the litigant of an ongoing stake in the controversy


Roe v. Wade

Facts: P attacks constitutionality of state anti-abortion law. P is no longer pregnant at hearing.

An issue will not be treated as moot if it is capable of repetition, yet evading review


McCulloch v. Maryland

Facts: MA enacted tax that would force US Bank in MA to pay taxes to state

Congress may enact laws that are necessary and proper to carry out their enumerated powers

States cannot tax the federal government


South Dakota v. Dole

Facts: Congress enacted statute which withheld part of highway fund if state allowed under-21 alcohol purchases

Congress can place conditions on grants to state and local government long as it’s not coercive


Gibbons v. Ogden

Facts: NY granted monopoly to P to operate ferry boats. D had a license from fed gov to do the same.

Congress may regulate any interstate commerce and pre-empt state law in the are


Champion v. Ames

Facts: D was indicted under an act which criminalized the interstate shipment of lottery tickets

Congress has the ability to regulate transport of goods in interstate commerce when such regulation does not affect the internal affairs of the state


Hammer v. Dagenhart

Facts: P was father of children, wanted injunction against fed statute restricting interstate commerce of products of child labor.

The power of Congress to regulate commerce does not include the power to regulate the production of goods intended for commerce


US v. Darby


Facts: EE’s wages/hours violated Fair Labor Standards Act

If the regulated intrastate activity has a substantial effect on interstate commerce, Congress may regulate the activity regardless of their motive


Wickard v. Filburn

Facts: P farmer brought action saying wheat quota was unconstitutional; growing more than quota for personal consumption

Congress may regulate activities of entities totally apart from interstate commerce, if those activities affect interstate commerce


Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US

Facts: P hotel owner refused entry to Blacks and challenged Civil Rights Act of 1964

Congress may regulate the ability of commercial institutions to deny service on the basis of race under its power to regulate interstate commerce


Katzenbach v. McClung

Facts: Local BBQ restaurant didn’t allow Blacks to eat there

Congressional power to regulate commerce can reach seemingly local activities if there is a connection to national commerce


New York v. US

Facts: Congress tried to force states to dispose of radioactive waste or take title

Congress cannot compel a state to enact or enforce a particular law or type of law


Printz v. US

Facts: Congress tried to require state officers to perform background checks for gun control

Congress cannot compel state and local actors to enforce federal reg. program