I. Introduction
Supp. (DC v. Heller)
II. Judicial Review
A. Why Judicial Review? CB 1-15
Marbury v. Madison
Facts: President Adams made last minute judicial appointments. Marbury was approved by the Senate and President, signed and sealed, but it wasn’t delivered before Jefferson took office. Jefferson ordered his sec. of state, Madison, to withhold the commissions.
Procedural History: Marbury petitioned for a writ of mandamus from Supreme Court. There was a statute issued by the legislature giving the Supreme Court the ability to issue writs of mandamus. Under the constitution the Supreme Court can only hear appellate matters, or has original jurisdiction for ambassadors, consuls or public ministers.
Holding: The list of original jurisdiction under Article III is an exhaustive list, not an open list, so under the Constitution we cannot offer original jurisdiction to Marbury. The next question is whether the court must adhere to the legislative enactment. Supreme Court must have judicial review over legislative enactments because otherwise the legislative would be too expansive and go un-checked. What is the purpose of writing a Constitution if it is not to be paramount? And what is the point of a judiciary if not to adhere to the Constitution?
Notes: This was the perfect issue for Marshall to achieve judicial review because the actual holding favors Jefferson.
B. Judicial Supremacy? CB 19-30
Cooper v. Aaron
Facts: Arkansas federal district court ordered desegregation of Little Rock schools. Governor of Arkansas blocked school board from completing desegregation by banning black students from Central High School and called out the National Guard. District Court issued an injunction against the Govern, troops were brought in and black kids got in.
Issue: Do State officials have to obey federal court orders resting on Constitutional interpretations of the Supreme Court?
Holding: Yes they do under Article VI of constitution and Marbury.
III. Federalism
A. Introduction CB 60-81
McCulloch v. Maryland
Facts: Congress chartered the Second Bank of the U.S. in 1816. Bank had branches in many states, including Maryland. In 1818 Maryland created an act that taxes all banks not chartered by the legislature. Such banks could only issue bank notes on stamped paper, available for a fee from the state, or pay a fine. There were penalties for those who didn’t pay.
Issue: Does Congress have the power to create a bank? Can a State tax that bank?
Holding: (1) Just because the state was ratified by groups of people broken up by state does not meant it was not a measure of the people. The Constitution derives from the people. (2) The U.S. bank is a necessary means to accomplish the collection of taxes, borrowing of money, regulation of commerce, etc. These are “necessary and proper” means to achieve those ends. Necessary and proper is not what is only absolutely necessary or indispensable. Rather necessary and proper is convenient, useful and essential instrument of the powers awarded to Congress by the constitution. (3) When a state issues a tax on state institution they are taxing only their constituents. When the tax a federal institution they are unfairly taxing the nation. (4) Constitution states that a State cannot lay taxes on imports and exports, and the bank is such an example. Maryland law is unconstitutional.
PRINCIPLE: The federal government supersedes the state government because the Constitution is an agreement of the people, not of the States. The method used to execute a power given to Congress by Constitution must be legitimate, appropriate and plainly adapted to that end.
* Establishes the concept of dual citizenship, one of the state and the other of the nation.
U.S.
s primary purpose. This is an indirect connection to interstate commerce.
Dissent’s Opinion: Argues that any thing, or combination of things, that effects the buying and selling of items across state lines falls under the jurisdiction of national power. In fact the nation is the only body that can fix an evil.
Houston E. & W.T. RY. Co. v. US (Shreveport)(Substantial Econ. Effect Test)
Facts: Several railroads made it cheaper to travel between two points in Texas, and points between Texas and Louisiana, despite the fact that they were the same distance. ICC challenged this and ordered the railroads to end discrimination. ICC challenged order
Issue: Can Congress regulate the intrastate affairs of an interstate carrier?
Holding: It is necessary for the fed to regulate intrastate commerce in order to prevent intrastate commerce from damaging interstate commerce.
* It seems that it matters to the court that this involves a railroad, an instrument of commerce. This seems to make it different than Knight.
* Knight is also different in that no particular State out rightly benefited from the act.
Swift v. U.S. (Within the Stream of commerce)
Facts: Price fixing of cattle. The cows travel but the buying and selling all occurs within one state.
Holding: Within the stream of commerce.
* The court seems to distinguish Knight by saying it is the beginning of the stream, and this is a mid-stream act, thus covered by the Commerce Clause.
Champion v. Ames (National Police Regulation)
