Con Law Fall 2010 Meyer
Chapter One: The Federal Judicial Power
A. The Authority for Judicial Review
a. Federal Courts Power
a.i.Present Power of Supreme Court:
a.i.1. Judicial Review (Judicial supremacy—we have given courts the power to declare laws or actions unconstitutional)
a.i.2. Court has authority to not follow law, but actually nullify the law and declare it void
a.i.3. Court wins whether it is constitutional or not
a.ii. Generally have power to hear most case where:
a.ii.1. Federal law is at issue
a.ii.2. United States is a party
a.ii.3. Suit is between a state and a citizen of another state
a.ii.4. Suit is between citizens of different states
a.iii. Limited:
a.iii.1. Sovereign immunity prevents suits against US and officers without consent
a.iii.2. 11th Amendment limits suits against states
a.iii.3. Can only hear cases or controversies—must be genuine, present dispute
a.iii.4. Claim must be real and have personal stake in outcome
a.iii.5. Injury must be remediable
a.iii.6. All state procedures must have been exhausted
a.iii.7. Supreme Court will refrain from deciding political questions
a.iii.7.a. Political Question Criteria:
a.iii.7.a.i. The question is textually committed to a different branch of government
a.iii.7.a.ii. OR, a “lack of judicially discoverable & manageable standards” for resolving issue
a.iii.7.a.iii. OR, issue can’t be decided without making initial policy determination of type clearly non-judicial;
a.iii.7.a.iv. OR, court can’t answer question without showing lack of respect to other branch;
a.iii.7.a.v.OR, there is an unusual for unquestioning adherence to political decision already made;
a.iii.7.a.vi. OR, there is a risk of multiple, inconsistent answers coming from different branches of government.
b. Source and Jurisdiction
b.i.Source: Article III, Section 1: federal judicial power “shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”
b.ii. Scope: Article III, Section 2: “In all other Cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”
c. Judicial Review—Judicial Supremacy:
c.i. Article III never expressly grants the federal courts the power to review the constitutionality of federal or state laws or executive actions.
c.ii. Court early held that Appellate jurisdiction includes the power to hear appeals regarding the constitutionality of acts of other branches of the federal government (Congress and Executive).
c.ii.1. Marbury v. Madison (1803): Chief Justice Marshall established judicial review while declaring unconstitutional a statute that he read as expanding the Court’s powers. established a number of key propositions
c.ii.1.a. Creates the authority for judicial review of executive and legislative acts
c.ii.1.b. Establishes Article III as the ceiling of federal court jurisdiction
c.ii.1.b.i. Congress can not expand the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
c.ii.1.b.ii. Congress can not authorize federal courts to hear cases beyond what is specified in Article III, and federal courts cannot gain jurisdiction by consent.
c.ii.1.c. Marshall was able to establish judicial review while declaring unconstitutional a statute that he read as expanding the Court’s powers
B. Relationship of State Court with the Supreme Court
a. Marbury established power of the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of federal executive actions and of federal statutes.
b. The following cases were key in establishing Court’s authority to review state court decisions:
b.i.Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee (1816): Two conflicting claims to certain land within Virginia. Π claimed title based on inheritance from British citizen who owned property. Δ claimed state had taken over land before the treaty between USA and England occurred and Π didn’t have valid claim.
b.i.1. Court held that treaty was controlling and thus the inheritance was valid. State Supreme Court said no—and it was then appealed back to US Supreme Court
b.i.2. Justice Story:
b.i.2.a. Articulated court’s authority to review state court judgments.
b.i.2.b. Argued that the Constitution presumed that the Supreme Court could review state court decisions because it creates a Supreme Court and gives Congress discretion whether to create lower federal courts. However, if Congress chose not to establish such tribunals, than the Supreme Court would be powerless to hear anything except for a few original jurisdiction cases.
b.i.2.c. State attachments, prejudices, jealousies, and interests might sometimes obstruct, control the regular administration of justice.
b.i.2.d. Supreme Court review is essential to ensure uniformity in the interpretation of federal law.
b.ii. Judiciary Act of 1789: Provided for Supreme Court to review state judgments
b.ii.1. §25: allowed Supreme Court to review state court decisions by a writ of error to the state’s highest court in many situations.
b.iii. Michigan v. Long: Long’s marijuana was found by police officer searching out of reach places.
b.iii.1. When should SCOTUS hear state ct. cases?
b.iii.2. State Constitution may grant more protection than federal, but not less.
b.iii.3. Here, SCOTUS can’t tell on what grounds Mich S.Ct. decision rests—and the language is the same.
b.iii.4. When unclear, SCOTUS will look to:
b.iii.4.a. Adequate and Independent State Grounds: If decision can be justified on state grounds alone, then no need to review it. (Doesn’t help here.)
b.iii.4.b. Clear Statement: If SCOTUS can’t tell, we’ll assume it’s Federal Law unless State gives clear statement to the contrary.
b.iii.5. This allows states to be more rights-protective, and also, for SCOTUS to review if they want them to.
C. Exceptions Clause: Restrictions of Supreme Court
a. Article III: “Exceptions and Regulations” Clause—still debated
a.i.One side: this provision provides Congress with broad powers to remove matters from the Supreme Court’s purview.
a.i.1. Framers of Constitution intended such congressional control as a check on the judiciary’s power.
a.i.2. Evidence: found in the fact that the first Congress didn’t vest Supreme Court with appellate jurisdiction over all types of cases and controversies.
a.ii. Other side: Congress is limited in its ability to control Supreme Court jurisdiction. The term “exceptions” was intended to modify the word “fact.”
a.ii.1. Framers were concerne
iii. Proponents argue that this case establishes that Congress may not restrict Supreme Court jurisdiction in an attempt to dictate substantive outcomes.
f. Takeaways:
f.i. Congress cannot manipulate Art. III powers in these ways:
f.i.1.Cannot remove appellate jurisdiction from SCOTUS (McCardle)
f.i.2.Cannot exercise power in a way that infringes upon the inherent rights/duties of another branch (Klein)
f.i.3.Cannot use power in a way that violates other sections of the Constitution
Chapter Two: The Federal Legislative Power
A. Introduction: Congress and the States
a. Who Can Act?
a.i.Congress—may act only if there is express or implied authority in the Constitution
a.ii. States—may act unless the Constitution prohibits the action.
a.ii.1. 10th Amendment: used by courts for the basis of protection of state governments from federal encroachments.
b. Constitutionality of Congressional Decision:
b.i.Must ASK:
b.i.1. Does Congress have the authority under the Constitution to legislate?
b.i.1.a. This requires defining the scope of powers granted to Congress (particularly Art. I, §8)
b.i.1.a.i. Article I, §8: Itemizes the enumerated congressional powers—the “main list”
b.i.2. If so, does the law violate another constitutional provision or doctrine, such as by infringing separation of powers or interfering with individual liberties?
c. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Was it constitutional for Δs to tax the Bank of the United States at a higher rate since state statute said any bank not chartered in Maryland (so, a national bank) shall be taxed at higher rate. Supreme Court sided with Congress.
c.i. Most important Supreme Court decision in American history defining the scope of Congress’ powers and delineating the relationship between federal government and the states.
c.ii. Arguments:
c.ii.1. Πs Arguments:
c.ii.1.a. Argues Congress does not have Article I power to establish national bankand even if they do, the tax is acceptable.
c.ii.1.b. State sovereignty
c.ii.2. Congress’ Argument:
c.ii.2.a. Implied power using “necessary and proper” clause
c.iii. Majority (Marshall):
c.iii.1. Considered 2 major questions:
c.iii.1.a. Does Congress have authority to create the Bank of the US? Yes.
c.iii.1.a.i. History: history of bank is authority for the constitutionality
c.iii.1.a.i.1. Those who opposed the first, endorsed creating the second.
c.iii.1.a.ii. Refuted argument of states retaining ultimate sovereignty—“Compact Federalism”
c.iii.1.a.ii.1. People are sovereign—not the states.
c.iii.1.a.iii.Scope of Congressional powers under Art. I
