CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
PROFESSOR RACE
SPRING 2015
CHAPTER 1 THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL POWER
The Essence of Civil Liberty is the right of every individual to claim protection
under the law.
1. The Authority for Judicial Review
– The framers of the Constitution did not set forth whether the federal judiciary should have the power of judicial review.
A. Authority for Judicial Review of Federal Questions
The authority was established in Marbury v. Madison (1803).
ü established authority for judicial review both legislative and executive acts.
ü The Supreme Court, NOT congress has the authority and duty to declare a congressional statute unconstitutional if the Court things it violates the Constitution.
ü The Supreme Court cannot have original jurisdiction over matters outside the constitutional question.
ü The SC may review state court opinions, but only to the extent that decision was decided based on Federal Law
B. Authority for Judicial Review of State Judgments
Martin v. Hunter’s Lessess (1816)
ü at a time when people saw state’s as sovereign independent nations
ü Va. Judge did not want to defer to Supreme Court, Supreme Court ruled that States have bias and therefore the Supreme Court could review their decisions.
ü Without this decision, states would have the right to invalidate treaties
Cohen v. Va. (1821)
– Supreme Court can review criminal decisions of state’s b/c state courts have biases
2. Limits on the Federal Judicial Power
A. Interpretive Limits
ü the limit on the court is the Constitution itself. Court cannot make law; only interpret
B. Congressional Limits
Ex Parte McCardle (1868)
ü General Rule: Court decided Congress does have the power to limit appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court
ü Exceptions and Regulations Clause: Congress could create an exception to the SC jurisdiction for review of matters of fact, but Congress could not eliminate the Court’s appellate jurisdiction for issues of law
ü Separation of Powers as a limit on Congress’ Authority: Congress can only change the law, but not direct verdicts
C. Justiciability Limits
Justiciability is the ability to hear a case
5 factors to determine Justiciability
1. Prohibition of Advisory Opinions
2. Standing
3. Mootness
4. Ripeness
5. Political Question
1. Prohibition of Advisory Opinions
ü Art. III Sec. 2 Case and Controversy Clause- provides the prohibition -against advisory opinions b/c there is no case or controversy.
ü There must be a dispute between adverse parties, otherwise is advisory
ü General Rule: A case is justiciable as long as it retains the essentials of an adversary proceeding.
2. Standing
Standing is the determination of whether specific person is the proper party to bring the matter to court.
3 Requirements for Standing:
1. Plaintiff must have suffered an injury (Injury)
-either actual or injury in fact
2. There must be a causal connection b/t the injury and the conduct complained of (Causation)
3. A favorable decision by the court w
uit may continue to be heard, even if
the named parties claim has become moot.
5. Political Question
Political Question- refers to allegations of constitutional violations that deferral courts will not adjudicate, and that the SC deems to be inappropriate for judicial review
Political Question applied: Congressional Self-Governance
ü Congress can only judge the qualifications expressly set by constitution. States cannot set term limits for members of Congress.
ü Unconstitutional for a state law to create term limits by keeping candidates for congressional office from being listed on ballot after they serve a set number of terms
CHAPTER 2 THE FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE POWER
1. Introduction
Federalism is the separation of powers
Commerce from a constitutional standpoint is any activity between states.
McCullough v. Maryland (1879)
ü Congress may only act if there is constitutional authority for that action
ü States may not impose restrictions/controls on a federally established agency against the government’s direction
ü Under the Necessary and Proper Clause of Art. I § 18.5, Congress may do whatever is not expressly prohibited
ü State cannot regulate something that places a significant burden on the federal government.
