Transcription
icleVI.- eIV.- owers- ‐ArticleIIIa. JudicialReviewi. Marburyv.Madison1. alreview2. legislativeactrepugnanttotheconstitutionisvoid3. Writofmandamus alowercourttodosomeact4. . AuthoritytoReviewStateCourtJudgmentsi. Martinv.Hunter’sLessee1. titutionality2. remacyargumentagainii. Cohensv.Virginia1. . ExclusivityinConstitutionalInterpretation
i. Cooperv.Aaron19581. ionofLittleRockschools2. cision3. Affirmsupre4. macyinMarbury5. eandinterpretsthelaw7. non- ‐litigantshavetoobeySCOUTorderaswellii. Dickersonv.U.S.1. unconstitutional2. av.Ariznadecision–NOTokay!d. LimitsonConstitutionalAdjudicationi. PoliticalChecksonSCOTUS:1. Appointmentprocess:nomination&confirmation2. Impeachment(occursinleg.Branch)3. Structuralchanges(“switchintime”)a. 4. t- ‐stripping”ExPartev.McCardle)5. nii. Art.III“CasesorControversies”Reqs:1. Istherightpersonlitigating?RIPENa. Standing theactionMOOTNESS2. Isittherighttimetolitigate?a. Ripeness emoteorspeculativetowarrantcourtaction.b. Mootness can’tbetoolateforadjudicationtomakeadifferencei. Exceptions1. capableofrepetitionbutevadingreview(Roev.Wade)2. actice.
iii. Standing:1. INJURYinfacta. Clapperv.AmnestyInternational(Supppg1)i. Threatenedinjurywasnotcertainlyimpendingii. Selfimposedinjury&hypotheticalinjuryb. U.S.v.Windsori. Thereisstandingii. DOMAact,taxes,IRSiii. taxes,actrequired2. iona. Lujanv.DefendersofWildlifeb. Allenv.Wrighti. utaresegregatingii. inkiii. Possiblydon’tusethiscasecuzfuckedup3. essedbyafavorablecourtdecisionInjuryinFacta. anadvisoryopinionb. lProtectionAgencyiv. . Noassertionof3rdpartyrights(justetii)2. Noadjudicationofgeneralizedgrievancesa. Hollingsworthv.Perryi. ndingtohearthiscaseii. Generalizedgrievanceisnotenough3. ffmustbewithzoneofinteresta. Zoneofinterest asabeneficiaryofthestatute4. Nopoliticalquestions5. Noadvisoryopinionsa. PrudentialStandingCases:i. Craigv.Borenii. Flastv.Coheniii. FECv.Aikens–zoneofinterestsiv. Vermont,quitamv. Rainesv.bird–nostandingvi. Bond–canchallengeindictmentevenifnostateinvolved
vii. Laird–ripenessv. CountermajortiarianDoctrine1. evi. NoPoliticalQuestions1. ovt;or2. s.3. RS1. hatsomeoneelsehasthatpower;2. 3. nation;4. AlackofRespecttocoordinatebranch;5. cisionalreadymade;or6. nt4. Situationsinwhichpoliticalquestionsmayarise:a. Foreignrelationsb. Existenceofhostilityc. Constitutionalamendmentsd. Guarantyclause
III.FederalismI:FederalSovereignPowera. smDoctrines[SeparationofPower]:i. Verticalseparationofpower(fed/states)ii. Horizontalseparationofpowers(fedbranches jed/leg/exec)Background:i. etonationalwelfareii. ostaspectsofpublicpolicyiii. . lyingtothestatesPolicePoweri. fety,welfare,moraloraestheticinterest.ii. tax&spend )SupremacyClause–Art.VI,Cl.2i. rethe“supremelawoftheland”ii. tiii. seoffederalpowerisconstitutional1. Statesmayenactsimilarlegislationtoafedoneif:a. b. Statelawisnototherwisepreempted2. andatedbyfederallawa. desStates CongressRegulatesbutDoesnotExcludeStates on(impliedpreemption)
f. 2cl.1i. 4)1. aka–statescan’tdiscriminateagainstnon- ‐residentsii. SimilartoDCC butNOTthesame1. Noprotectionforcorporations2. Congresscan’tlegislatearoundP&I3. OnlyFUNDAMENTALeconomicorlibertyrights4. Nomarketparticipantexceptioniii. SupremeCrtNHv.Piper1. yforin- ‐stateresidentsiv. Saenzv.Rose(seeagainlaterinSDP)1. ingwelfarebenefits,unconstitutionalv. CamdenConstructionCase1.g. GuarantyClause–Art.IV§4i. publicformofgovernment”1. nforcethisclause(Lutherv.Bordan)h. Necessary&ProperClause- ‐Art.I§8cl.18i. hefederalgovernmentii. InterpretationsofN&C:1. StrictConstructionist(Jefferson)v.a. itution2. BroadConstructionism(Hamilton)a. expandingpowersavailabletogovernment3. Structuralism(Madison)a. onistBroadConstructionsimiii. McCullochv.Maryland(75)1. ll
2. seargumentiv.v. ry&propertocallAAA”)1. Act?Yes a. vernment2. BroadscopegiventoCongressunderNecessary&Propera. tutionallyenumeratedpower3. 5considerationsisbeyondscopeofnec&prop:a. dpower?b. Modestadditiontoexistinglawc. ReasonablyAdaptedtocongress’powertoactd. StatueproperlyAccountsforstatesinterestse. tooAttenuatedvi. NFIBv.Sebelius(101)1. Governmentreliedoncommercepower nec&propclause,notallowed2. properuseofnec&prop
IV.Congress’LegislativePowers–ArticleI§8a. Checkonthevalidityoffederallegislation:i. Whatenumeratedpower?ii. - ‐Congress'EnumeratedPowersCOMMERCE- ‐cl.3TAX&SPEND- ‐cl.1WAR&DEFENSETREATYNEC&PROPER- ‐cl.18bankruptcypower- ‐cl.4other?postoftice- ‐cl.7coin b.CommercePower(Art.I§8cl.3)i. Tribes.”ii. 4erasofSCOTUSCommerceAnalysis:1. 1800–1890:LegislativeInactivity2. 1887- ‐1937:JudicialSkepticisma. IndustrialRevolution,Laissezfairetrumps3. 1937–1995:JudicialDeferencea. whatevergoforitcongress,NewDeal4. 1995–Present:ReaffirmingLimitsonCommercePower
ngLimitsonCPiii. UnderC.P.Congresscanregulate:1. Channels;a. Highways,waterways,airtraffic2. Instrumentality;&a. Cars,trucks,ships,planes3. . Regulatingactivityis“economic”innature;andi. “QuintessentiallyEconomic”:1. Produced2. Distributed3. Consumedb. ommerce(Wickard)iv. ModernCommercePowerTest:1. tsinterstatecommerce.a. Jurisdictionalelements(nexus)b. Congressionalfindingsv. OldTimeyCases:1. Gibbonsv.Ogden(110) hatpassesbetween2states2. ShreveportRateCase(113) oadtraffic3. NLRBv.Jones&LaughlinSteelCorp.(125) urs&wages4. USv.Darby(127) ingactivities5. Wickardv.Filburn(130)a. Broadestinterpretationofthecommerceclauseb. thedideffectinterstatecommerceintheaggregatec. le,ifitconcludesthat
heregulationoftheinterstatemarketinthatcommodityd. Aggregateeffectvi. CivilRightsCases:1. HeartofAtlantaMotelv.U.S.(133)a. Hotelsareaninstrumentalitiesofinterstatecommerce2. Katsenbachv.McClung(Ollie’sBBQ)a. Somuchofthemeatwasfromoutofstatevii. ContemporaryCases:1. Perezv.U.S.(135)a. ecommerce2. U.S.v.Lopez(136) ectsinterstatecommercea. GunFreeSchoolZonesActof1990b. Strucuralistargumentc. Rationalbasistest 3. U.S.v.Morrison(144)a. ViolenceAgainstWomenActof1994b. Inappropriateuseofcommercepowerc. Jurisdictionalnexus tisunderthecommercepowerd. Congressionalfindings,butthatisnotenoughe. Policepowerreservedforthestates4. Gonzalesv.Raich(149)a. Potgrowing,okaytoregulateaillegalmarketb. UsedargumentsinWickardv.Filburntosaythatpeoplei. Dissent tofederalregulatoryreachc. Extendedtheeconomic- aathomeforpersonalconsumptioninnoneconomic5. NFIBv.Sebelious(157)a. tivityb. failuretoactisnotaneconomicavidityc. anindividualfromcradletograve”c. Taxing&SpendingPower- ‐Art.I§8cl.1i. Taxing&SpendingPower1. fenseandgeneralwelfare.”
1. ChildLaborCase(Baileyv.Drexel)a. Taxv.PenaltyExceedinglyFactors:heavyburdeni. ExceedinglyheavyburdenScienterReqii. Agencylooktolegislativeintent)iii. 2. US.Kahriger(191)a. rb. courageordeteranaciditytoblurtheline3. NFIBv.Sebelius(193)a. dthatisokaybecauseitpassesthe3partBaileytestb. IRSistheonethatimplements4. McCrayv.U.S.a. ctiondirectlyBaileyTax/PenaltyFactors2. factarevenue- ‐raisingmeasureii. TaxingPowerasaRegulatoryDeviceiii. SpendingPowerasRegulatoryDevice1. fiedconditionsinordertoqualifyforfederalfunds2. U.S.v.Butler(197)a. oductionb. Govtgives tofarmerswhodon’tgrowcottonc. dforstatepowerd. endingclause3. CharlesC.StewardMachineCo.v.Davisa. Payrolltaxonemployers
DoleSpending/PenaltyFactorsb. MotiveortemptationsisNOTcoercionsc. Purposeoftheactistosafeguardthetreasury4. Helveringv.Davis(202)a. sclearlywrong,adisplayofarbitrarypower”b. ypower5. SouthDakotav.Dole(204)a. ngage,promotesaferoadsb. DoleFactors:i. rconstitutionalconcernsraised?6. NFIBv.Sebelius(209)a. ingb. Guntotheheadstandard(216):i. Conditionsdonotlimithowstatesusedfundsii. Fedthreatatissuewastheremovalofanindependentpre- fundiontiii. Thethreatedremovalwasalargeamountoffundingiv. anadegreev. tionsuponinitiallyreceivingthefunds
V.War&TreatyPower–Art.1§8a. War/DefensePower:i. dmakeRulesconcerningCapturesonLandandWater”1. declarewar;2. raise&supportarmies;3. provide&maintainanavy;&4. organize,arm,discipline&callforthamilitiab. Woodsv.CloydW.MillerCo.(399)i. stitutionalii. acetimeaswellaswartimec. Missouriv.Holland(401)i. MigratoryBirdTreatyAct1. sentorratification2. oftheUSd. Downesv.Bidwell(405)i. PuertoRicofruitcaseii. Naturalv.artificialrightsiii. mend&StateSovereigntyLimitsonFeda. 10thAmendmenti. eStatesrespectively,ortothepeople”b. Coylev.Oklahomai. alshouldbec. U.S.v.Californiai. ntintheConstitution.”d. NationalLeagueofCitiesv.Usery(166)i. loyeesii. chofthefederalgovernmente. Garciav.SanAntioniMetroTransit(167)i. rciaii. . NewYorkv.UnitedStates(170)i. idedisposalofwastewith3“incentive”
ii. taketitle”sanctionasunconstitutionaliii. RULE commandeering whenfederalgovernmentrequiresstatestoLEGISLATEg. Printzv.U.S.(175)i. erallegalizationii. Unconstitutionaltomakestatesdobackgroundchecks1. Makingthestatesintopuppetsofthefedgovtnotokaya. ReducingthemtopuppetsofaventriloquistCongressh. Renov.Condon(178)i. DMVsweresellinginfo1. uiringthestatestoregulatetheirowncitizens2. bestatecouldbeanyonei. StateSovereignImmunity&11thAmendmenti. ��ii. Sovereignimmunity can’tbringthekingtocourt1. Essentially,youcan’tsueastateiii. Basic11thAmendment1. ta. ATexancan’tsueCaliforniaiv. Expanded11thAmend1. Hansv.Louisianaa. 2. Aldenv.Mainea. nstatecourt3. SeminoleTribeofFloridav.Floridaa. ivesov.Imm.Withspendingwithstringsattachedv. HowtoBypassSovereignImmunity:1. Stateconsents2. SuitsagainststateofficialsforINJUNCTIONonly3. dbysovereignimmunity
VII. FederalLimitsonRegulationofCommercebyStatesa. DormantCommerce“Clause”i. ause(Art.1§8Cl3)ii. deralpolicyonagivensubjectmatteriii. ogetherb. eProtectionistPurpose/EffectDisprop.AdverseEffect Doesthelawadvancealegitgovt.interest? Lessdiscrim.alt.available? Discriminintent: legislativehistory& wholobbiedforthelaw PikeBalancing PikeBalancingTest: operation effect burden benetiti. FaciallyDiscriminate1. FDlawsarepresumptivelyinvalidUNLESS:a. Theyadvancealegitimatelocalinterest,ANDb. therewasnonon- restii. Impermissiblyprotectionistpurposeoreffectiii. Disproportionateadverseeffectiv. FaciallyDiscriminatoryCases:1. Gibbonsv.Ogdena. i. tolegislate
2. Wilsonv.BlackBirdCreekMarshCo.(226)a. state3. Cooleyv.BoardofWardensa. EstablishesDCCb. sandbringinharborc. Localv.nationaldistinction(notusedanymore)4. Railwaycases:a. SouthernRailwayCo.v.King(231)i. GAsafetylawtoblowyourhornasgoingthroughtownb. SeaboardAirlineRailwayv.Blackwelli. Hadtostop124timesin123miletrip5. Philadelphiav.NewJersey(233)a. inatorybecausenooutofstateb. PhiladelphiawontheNJlawwasheldtobeinvalid6. Granholmv.Heald(237)a. Icegrapewineb. oryburdenonoutofstatewineriestosellwine7. Mainev.Taylor(238)a. Successfulquarantineexceptioni. Keepdifferentstuffoutb. nowwhatcouldhappentotheenvironmentc. Noalternativemeans8. ChemicalWasteManagementv.Hunta. ouswaste9. 8)a. Faciallydiscriminatorytaxesb. y10. WestLynnCreameryv.Healy(239)a. Faciallydiscriminatorysubsidiesb. ngoutofstateactorsc. ndtotrytomakeinstateproducersmorecompetitive11. Taxesa. CompleteAutoTransitv.Brady(293)i. d.1. iz&thetaxingstate;2. Thetaxisfairlyapportioned;3. ?4. stateii. Taxwasupheldv. NotSubjecttoDCCIF:
1. ;2. Thetaxisfairlyapportioned;3. Di. Andtaxisfairlyrelatedtoservicesprovidedvi. HomeProcessingRequirements1. DeanMilkCov.Madison(242)a. . otherwayc. instinstateandoutofstate2. BalancingAnalysisa. 3. C&ACarbone,Incv.Clarkstown(244)a. Ordinancehasinterstateeconomiceffectsb. utofstateeffects,statelawoverturned4. UnitedHaulerAssociationv.Oneida- ‐Herkimer(246)a. eoperatesthebizb. Statelawwasupheldvii. MarketParticipantException1. ivityinwhich[it]isamajorparticipant.”2. gulator,itmaydiscriminateinfavoritsownresidentsa. Buyerorsellerofgoods&services,ORb. Subsidiaryprogram3. South- ‐CentralTimberDevelopmentv.Wunnickie(250)a. 2differentmarketsatplay:sellingv.processingb. ermarkettheywerebeingregulatorsi. Hughesv.AlexandriaScrapviii. FaciallyNEUTRAL,DISCRIMINATORYINTENT1. Baldwinv.GARSeeling,Inc.a. InvalidatedMilkControlActsetminmilkpricesinNYb. TookawayOhio’seconomicadvantage2. HPHood&Sonsv.DUMonda. tinNY,curtailsvolumeofinterstatecommerce3. Huntv.WAStatea. wer)standardlabelb. intheapplemarket,butleftNCunaffected
c. bothstickers)d. Burden raisedcostofdoingbizinWA4. BacchusImportsv.Diasa. Hawaii,removedliquortaxonHawaiianliquorsi. Howtofinddiscriminatoryintent:1. Legislativehistory2. Wholobbiedforthelaw5. Exonv.Gov’tofMDa. inginMDb. erewerenoinstaterefinerssoitwasokay6. Minnestoav.Cloverleafa. dcontainerb. Burdenonoutofstateinterestinminimalc. Used“Pike”- ‐likefactorsix. T1. Pikev.Churcha. stlyforoutofstateproducersb. ebalancingtestc. PikeBalancingTest:PIKEi. faciallydiscrim?)ii. ii. calbenefitsofthelaw?iv. pact?2. Kasselv.ConsolidatedFreight(265)a. Notfaciallydiscrim,burdensinterstatecommb. Crtappliesbalancingtestc. ftrucksd. utweighedthebenefitVIII. ExecutiveBranch&SeparationofPowersa. ExecutivePowers–Art.II§1i. UnitedStates,”1. broadauthorityinPreztoexecutelawsii. rmustissuefromConstitutionoractofCongress1. PursuanttoCongressionalAuthority- ‐ArticleII Congressionallydelegatedpower(Valid)2. entpowers
a. nchorpreventanotherbranchfromcarryingouttask3. inuscongress’powersiii. AppointmentPower–Art.II§21. dconsent”ofSenate2. ��officerswithPrezorheadsofdepartmentsa. Buckleyv.Valeo(383)- embersnotokay–itsexecutiveinnaturei. AskwhatisthechargeoftheAdministrativeBody?1. Enforcementpower,2. Rulemaking,3. Adjudicationiv. RemovalPower1. moveanyexecutiveappointeewithoutcause2. cera. Bowsherv.Synar3. Humphrey’sExecutorv.UnitedStatesa. “quasi- ‐legislative”or“quasi- maylimittheremovaloftheseindividualsv. VetoPower1. tmentValidFederalLawa. BICAMERALISM i. Bothchambersagreeb. PRESENTMENTi. )a. lorjoint- ‐resolutionSigningStatement I’llsign,butIfundamentallyhateandwon’tenforce
b. ExecutivePrivileges&Immunities:i. ritysecretesc. UnitedStatesv.Nixon(406)i. lindictment1. evidenceincriminaltrialii. Protectableonlyif:1. Nationalsecurityinteresta. Diplomaticb. Militaryinterests2. PolicyRationalea. thattheircommunicationsmaybereleasedd. PresidentialLiabilityi. ityfromdamagesliabilitypredicatedonofficialacts1. i. 3possibilitiesforindictmentofasittingPrez:1. isover;2. sealindictmentuntilPresidentleavesoffice;3. waituntilPresident’stermexpirestoindictiii. Clintonv.Jones(411)1. ohistakingoffice?NO2. hmentbecauseheliedtoagrandjury(perjury)e. Congress’PowertoImpeach–Art.I,§2Cl.5i. crimesandmisdemeanors”–Art.II§4ii. ImpeachmentProcess:1. HouseofRepshassolepowerofimpeachment2. Senateshallhavesolepowertotryallimpeachmentsf. RandomExtraCases:i. ez’useofpowerhereii. forPreztoremoveiii. Toubeyv.U.S.–nofacts s,justcangiveawayitslegislativepoweriv. U.S.v.CartissWright- lativepowerv. USSR
IX.IndividualRights:DUEPROCESSa. DueProcess htsthatareowedtoapersonb. BeforeCivilWari. Baronv.Mayor&Ci
III. Federalism)I:)Federal)Sovereign)Power)) a. ValuesServed*by*Federalism:*) i. Autonomy) ii. Checking)concentratedpower) iii. Localism) iv. Citizen)choice)
