Cases Flashcards
(95 cards)
Case that establishes the authority for judicial review of both federal Executive and Legislative acts.
Held that when an act of congress is in conflict with the Constitution, it is the obligation of the Court to uphold the Constitution because it is the “supreme law of the land”
Marbury v. Madison
??
Powell v. Mccormack
One of most important SC decisions as it defines the scope of Congress’s powers and delineates the relationship between the federal govt and the states.
(Question of if it was constitutional for the State of Maryland to tax the Bank of the United States).
McCulloch v. Maryland
Effects interstate commerce.
*Backyard Tomatoes Example
NLRB v. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp
Discusses Express preemption
Federal cigarette labeling and advertising act preemption provisions
1. No statement relating to smoking and health of the statement required by section 1333 of this title shall be required on a cigarette package
2. No requirement or prohibition based on smoking and health shall be imposed understate law with respect to the advertising or promotion of any cigarettes which are labeled under this provision.
Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly
Preemption because state law impedes the achievement of federal objective.
California says no nuclear power plants until there has been developed in the US through it’s authorized agency has improved and there exists a demonstrate technology a means for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste
FIELD PREEMPTION IS OUT
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission
DETERMINES: Congress can amend the statute (change the law) if it doesn’t like the way SCOTUS interprets it
About:Congress adopted the statute providing that a pardon was in admissible as evidence in the claim for return of seize property. That statute provided that apartment without an express disclaimer of guilt was proof that the person needed the rebellion and would deny the federal courts jurisdiction over the claim. If you have a pardon the SCOTUS does not have jurisdiction so you lose.
US v. Klein
‘91 court ruled that actions brought under the security laws had to be brought within one year of discovering the facts giving rise to the violation and three years of the violation Congress then amended the law to allow cases that were filed before this decision to go forward if they could have been brought under the prior law
EFFECT: reopened actions dismissed under SCOTUS prior rulings
Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm Inc.
An exception to the rule of no third party standing.
(3rd party rule-A plaintiff can assert only injuries that he or she has suffered not the claims of third parties who are not part of the lawsuit. No generalized grievance must be within zone of interest)
Singleton v. Wulff
Nationwide class action parents of black public school children alleged that the IRS is not adopted sufficient standards and procedures to fulfill its obligation to deny tax-exempt status to racially discriminatory private schools
HOLDING: court holds that they do not have standing. Article 3 advises the plaintiff must allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendants allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief the injury must be distinct and palpable, not abstract or conjectural
Allen v. Wright
EPA denied request from the state of Massachusetts asking that the EPA regulate gas emissions from cars
The state of Massachusetts is suing BPA for not enforcing the Clean Air Act
(headed under “standing” in notes)
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency
A lack of judicially discoverable a manageable standards for resolving an issue. Political question doctrine.
Case goes to Scotus. Scotus says it is not just to seeable we are not getting involved because we find to the plaintiff we are saying state of Rhode Island is invalid
HOLDING Congress is responsible for deciding who the representatives from each state are in by making this decision congresses saying “this is the government”
Luther v. Borden
13
Nixon v. US
Court says they are out of the business of resolving any claim in the Republican guarantee clause.
About the case: the plaintiffs are set with the TN legislature who distributed seats unevenly so TN is violating the TN Constitution and they say there’s no political solution here because NO legislature would vote to change a system that would result in them losing their jobs.
Plaintiffs get creating using EPC saying they’re denied Equal Protection Clause because their votes don’t count
Baker v. Carr
Courts conclude that map is not just a simple for the simple reason that there are no standards governing the question where those boundaries should exist.
Question: is this the sort of thing ports can wrap their brains around and make a decision ( political map )
HOLDING: we don’t know.(know it when you see it)
Vieth v. Jubelirer
Question: can the president back on the treaty with Taiwan.
HOLDING: for justices that the fact of the Constitution doesn’t say anything about it makes it non justicable
Text does say the Senate has a role in ratifying treaties but not backing out of them
Goldwater v. Carter
A group of convicted sex offender sought to dismiss petitions that attempted to indefinitely commit them under the Adam Walsh Child protection and safety act. At trial the Federal District Court dismissed the petition on appeal the US Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal.
HOLDING: the Protection and Safety Act exceeded the scope of congressional authority by enacting a law that imprisons/confines a person solely because of “sexual dangerousness” where the prosecution does never even need to allege that the “dangerousness” violates the federal law
(5 factor test)
US v. Comstock
10th amendment, five factor
Breyer v. Thomas
I didn’t plaintive brought this lawsuit seeking an injunction to restrain Gibbons defendant from operating steamships on New York waters in violation of his exclusive privilege. Id. is granted the injunction and Gibson Gibbons appealed asserting that his steamships or license under the act of Congress entitled “an act for enrolling and licensing ship some vessels be employed in the coasting trade and fisheries in for regulation the same”
Gibbons v. Ogden
Mining, production, manufacturing are not commerce
Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
Court is struggling with what is commerce and what is interstate commerce. The idea is that there is a definitional struggle going on
A.L.A. Schecter Poultry Corp v. US
The child labor case
Hammer v. Dagenhart
Does congress have the constitutional power to prohibit the shipment in interstate commerce of lumber manufactured by employees whose wages are less than a prescribed minimum or whose weekly hours of labor at that wage are greater than a prescribed wage
United States v. Darby
Rejection of the formalism of the Era 2 cases.
Aggregation idea - if everyone did what he did it would have a big effect on the economy
Wickard v. Filburn
