Select Page

Constitutional Law I
University of Dayton School of Law
Kloppenberg, Lisa A.

Constitutional Law Outline
 
I.              Federal Judiciary Power
a.       Marbury v. Madison (Marshall)
Where the Constitutional as interpreted by Scotus, conflicts with the laws or actions of the other branches of government, Scotus may declare such laws or actions unconstitutional and invalid.
b.      Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. (Scalia)
Legislation that directs the federal courts to reopen cases on whch the courts have passed final judgment unconstitutionally violates separation of powers.
c.       Allen v. Wright (O’Connor)
Standing requires a Π to allege a personal injury fairly traceable to the ∆’s allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.
d.      Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (Scalia)
Congressional statutes cannot confer standing to Πs who suffered no actual injury in fact.
 
II.           Federal Executive Power
a.       Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (Black)
The President of the United States does not have the inherent authority to order the involuntary surrender of private property to the government.
b.      United States v. Nixon (Burger)
Conversations between the President and his advisors are generally privileged, but the privilege is not absolute.
c.       Clinton v. City of New York (Stevens)
The Line Item Veto is unconstitutional as it surrenders legislative prerogative to the executive branch which is against the constitutional separation of powers.
d.      Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (Hughes)
Congress may not delegate law making authority to an executive agency without prescribing specific standards for exercise of that authority.
e.       Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan (Hughes)
It is a violation of the separation of powers for Congress to delegate law-making authority to the President without imposing standards or rules limiting that authority.
f.        Whitman v. American Trucking Assn. Inc. (Scalia)
Any congressional authorization of decision-making authority must establish an intelligible principle to which the person or body authorized to act is directed to conform.
g.       INS v. Chadha (Burger)
Legislative action is not legitimate unless there is bicameral approval and presentment to the President.
h.       Morrison v. Olson (Rehnquist)
Since the Independent Counsel is an inferior officer, a law giving judges the authority to appoint an Independent Counsel did not violate the Constitution.
i.         United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp (Sutherland)
The non-delegation doctrine does not bar Congress from delegating great authority and discretion to the President in the conduct of foreign affairs.
j.        Dames & Moore v. Regan (Rehnquist)
The President has the power to settle claims by US citizens against foreign government

der the Commerce Clause, to exclude any article from interstate commerce, in judgment that they are injurious to the public health, morals or welfare. In this case, a company refused to pay federal minimum wage and this was deemed injurious to the national commerce.
g.       Wickard v. Filburn (Jackson)
Congress’ commerce authority extends to all activities having a substantial effect on interstate commerce, including those that do not have such a substantial effect individually, but do when judged by their national aggregate effects.
h.       United States v. Lopez (Rehnquist)
Congressional authority to regulate pursuant to the Commerce Clause extends to only those activities that rationally implicate (1) the channels of interstate commerce, (2) the instrumentalities of interstate commerce or (3) activities having a substantial effect upon interstate commerce.
i.         United States v. Morrison (Rehnquist)
Congress may not, pursuant to the Commerce Clause, regulate a local activity solely on the basis that it has substantial effects on interstate commerce when viewed in the nationwide aggregate.