Constitutional Law I Outline

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
AZMY

1) NOTE: de jure discrimination is purposeful discrimination; de facto discrimination is when the act racially neutral in language, administration and purpose, but has a disadvantaging effect. Modern cases have relied on statistical data to show a discriminatory pattern of administration

I. ROLE OF SUPREME COURT IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER

A. Authority for Judicial Review: stems from Marbury v. Madison (1803)
1.Against this backdrop:
a. Federalists (Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay) vs. Anti-Federalists (Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson)
b. Anti-Federalists made the case that the Constitution was destroying the identity of the state
i. Did not like judiciary bc it was never accountable to the people
c. Election of 1800, Jefferson elected president and no one more hated by federalists than he
i. Adams made midnight appointments in the days prior to his leaving officeàWilliam Marbury was one such appointment
a) Secretary Marshall at the time was supposed to deliver the commission, but did not, although it was signed and sealed.
2.Marbury v. Madison In the case, William Marbury attempted to invoke the Sup. Ct.’s original jurisdiction, pursuant to § 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789
a. Judiciary Act of 1789 was passed by the legislature
b. Note that this goes against Article III of the Constitution—Chief Justice Marshall makes this the center point
3.Focuses on 3 questions:
a. Does Marbury have right to commission?
i. Yes—the right to his commission vests when it is signed by the secretary of state, not when it is delivered to Marbury
a) A refusal by Madison to deliver it is a plain violation of that right, BUT this is not the proper channel to attain a remedy…
b. Do laws of the land afford Marbury a Remedy?
i. Yes – reason to form gov’t is that it will help you when you’ve been wronged!
ii. every right entitled to remedy – foundation of civil system, “gov’t of laws, not of men” – even pres must comply w/ legal obligations
iii. Exception: for political questions:
a) PQs: const. gives discretion to the political branches
1. Ex. Commander in Chief can conduct wars w/o interference from judiciary—Sup. Ct. cannot tell president how to conduct a war nor can court tell president to veto a bill because these are political acts
2. Remedy for PQ is not at law, remedy is “political” – people have check on this power, elections, impeachment, etc.
c. Is that remedy a mandamus from this Court? NOà
i. Mandamus is not a political question but this case was unconstitutionally brought to the Sup. Ct. so court will not issue the mandamus, it is denied
a) Involves legal right of an individual, duty of branches to enforce
b) If a power granted to the President, is intended solely to be used at the will of the President in his own discretion, it is not examinable by the courts.
1. If a specific duty is assigned by law and individual rights depend upon performance of that duty, an individual with vested rights that has been injured may resort to the laws of the country for redress.
ii. Ҥ 13 of the 1789 Judiciary Act is in Opposition to the Constitution and is therefore UNCONSTITUIONAL, and