consitutuion

representation(state wide).

By state

Presiding Officer(house)

Speaker of the House

what did article 1 say ?

established the legislative branch, which is called the Congress.

appellate jurisdiction

he power to examine the rulings made by lower courts and uphold or overturn those decisions

fifth amendment

"...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

legislative powers

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."

Unique Powers(house)

- The power to impeach, which requires a simple majority vote threshold. - Revenue bills must begin in the House (this is specified in Article 1, Section 7).

Unique Powers(senate)

- The power to try impeachment (that is, to actually oust the person from office), which requires a two-thirds vote threshold (the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial). - Advice and Consent (this is outlined in Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2)

14th Amendment

14th Amendment

term length(house)

2 years

Minimum age(house)

25 years old

minimum age(senate)

30 years old

term length(senate)

6 years

Everson v. Board of Education.

A taxpaying citizen of New Jersey, Arch R. Everson, filed a lawsuit declaring that the use of public funds to provide transportation for students to and from schools—including private religious schools—violated the Establishment Clause. Although the Court found that this particular use of public funds did not violate the Establishment Clause, the Court did issue strong, definitive language on the topic that would be invoked in future cases. Justice Hugo Black wrote: The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.... In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State'" (Everson v. Board of Education, 1947).

Articles of Confederation

A weak constitution that governed America during the Revolutionary War.

Article V

Amending the Constitution

21st Amendment

Amendment which ended the Prohibition of alcohol in the US, repealing the 18th amendment

name another argument for a republic like government.

Another strong argument for the republican form of government was that it could theoretically defuse the class warfare that had torn earlier societies apart.

what are the 3 references of congress' in the constitution under article?

Article I, Section 2 (Clause 3): "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers..." Article I, Section 8 (Clause 1): "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." As noted earlier, the first part of this clause is known as the Taxing and Spending Clause. Article I, Section 9 (Clause 4): "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

RFRA

As a result of Employment Division and other similar cases, Congress passed the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) to restore the Compelling Interest Test as set forth in the Sherbert case and to guarantee its application in all cases in which free exercise of religion was burdened, even within states. However, in City of Boerne v. Flores (1997), the Court struck down RFRA as it applies to the states, saying that the act went beyond Congress's power to legislate because it increased application of the Bill of Right' protections without a constitutional amendment. Even though the Court had used the Incorporation Doctrine to apply similar protections to the states, the Court essentially declared that it alone had the authority to do so, and Congress could not. Consequently, many states responded to this ruling by adopting their own versions of RFRA.

Borrow money

Borrow Money

Money

Coin/Regulate value of Money

article 1 section 8

Congress can't apply an indirect tax scheme that isn't equitably implemented and regulated across the country.

Federal Courts

Constitute Tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court

War

Declare War

14th Amendment

Declares that all persons born in the U.S. are citizens and are guaranteed equal protection of the laws

International Law

Define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations

Post Office & Roads

Establish Post Offices and post Roads

Naturalization

Establish Uniform laws for Immigration and Bankruptcies

Quantity(house)

Every state has at least 1; no maximum

quantity(senate)

Exactly 2 per state

District of Columbia

Exercise exclusive jurisdiction of Washington D.C. and places purchased within States (with their consent) for special purposes (i.e. military facilities)

Everson v. Board of Education (1947)

the Supreme Court upheld a local government program that provided free transportation to parochial school students

Corfield v. Coryell (1823)

Justice Bushrod Washington ruled that the clause only covers privileges or immunities which are "in their nature, fundamental," which belong to the citizens of all free governments, and which have always been enjoyed by American citizens. Thus, noncitizens of New Jersey were not entitled to gather oysters and clams as citizens were, since such a privilege could hardly be considered fundamental.

Vacancies(house)

Filled by a special election

Vacancies(senate)

Filled by an appointment of the Governor or by special election

Army

Raise and support Armies (Appropriations limited to two years at a time)

Citizen of the U.S.(senate)

For at least 9 years

Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution

Full faith and credit must be given in each state to the records, acts, and judicial proceedings of the other states, and "the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof"

Article 4 (paragraph 3)

Full faith and credit shall be given in each of these states to the records, acts, and judicial proceedings of the courts and magistrates of every other state." An example of such "records, acts, and judicial proceedings"

Reynolds v. United States (1878)

George Reynolds was a Mormon who was prosecuted under antibigamy laws. He argued that as a Mormon male, he had a religious duty to have more than one wife. This posed a dilemma for the judges, since such concepts had never been precisely defined. In its decision, the Court referenced words used by Thomas Jefferson in a letter replying to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut in 1801: Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. (para. 1)

Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon (1922)

H.J. Mahon filed suit against the Pennsylvania Coal Company, which intended to mine for coal beneath his land. Many years earlier, Mahon obtained surface rights to the land from the company; however, the company retained the right to mine beneath the land. Yet, the state passed the Kohler Act in 1921 prohibiting coal mining in such a way that would cause damage to surface structures. Mahon sued to prevent the mining operation on the basis of this law. This act and the idea it was based upon were at stake in the Court's deliberations. The Court decided that the company's loss of mining rights due to the act constituted an act of eminent domain by the state of Pennsylvania, which required just compensation. Furthermore, the states could engage in regulatory taking, but they could not go "too far," a standard which is fairly arbitrary and subjective, as Justice Brandeis noted in his dissenting opinion.

Section 3 of Article II

He must occasionally report to the Congress on the State of the Union (Clause 1). This has come to be an annual speech that the president gives before Congress to great pomp and circumstance

Doctrine of Incorporation

In short, this doctrine maintains that certain provisions contained in the Bill of Rights are incorporated to the states

Evolution Versus Creationism

In Epperson v. Arkansas (1968), the Court said that a state law banning the teaching of evolution was unconstitutional since no secular reason existed for such a ban. Some states responded by requiring creationism be taught alongside evolution, but this, too, was struck down in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) as having religious motivation. Since this case, some school districts have resorted to including intelligent design theories in their curriculum. To date the Supreme Court has not ruled on the constitutionality of teaching intelligent design, though a lower court ruling declared it unconstitutional (Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District PDF, 2005).

Religious Instruction in Schools

In one of the first cases regarding the Establishment Clause, the Court ruled in McCollum v. Board of Education (1948) that a school allowing outside groups to provide religious instruction to students during the school day on school property was unconstitutional, even if alternatives to the religions instructions were provided to students not wishing to participate. A few years later, however, the Court upheld as constitutional the ability of school districts to permit students to leave for portions of the day to receive religious instruction off campus (Zorach v. Clauson, 1952).

The Lemon Test

In the landmark case Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), the Court established a three-part test (the Lemon Test) to determine the constitutionality of providing public benefits to parochial schools. It stated the following: (a) the benefit must be secular in purpose, (b) its primary purpose must not advance or inhibit religion, and (c) it must not foster "excessive entanglement" with religion. The Court has been very strict with primary and secondary schools but more accommodating with religious universities and colleges. In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), the Court extended the child-benefit theory to accept educational voucher programs for a valid secular purpose and found it neutral towards religion.

Limit on the size of constituency(senate)

Not applicable - a Senator represents an entire state regardless of the population.

why did james madison oppose a pure democracy?

James Madison, writing in Federalist 10, provided the strongest argument against pure democracy. He began by noting complaints about the instability and chaos that had been flowing in from the states in the aftermath of the Revolutionary War. Madison addressed the topic of republics with these concerns in mind. factions were another problem with pure democracy he wrote in the federalist paper 10, "Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.

why did jefferson oppose the national bank?

Jefferson believed that because the power to create a bank is not specifically listed in Article I, the 10th Amendment reserves this power to the states and, therefore, the bank cannot be considered constitutional.

Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority (1936)

Justice Brandeis outlined these rules to promoting judicial deference to the legislature as much as possible, and to avoid involving the court in decisions based on constitutional grounds except when absolutely necessary. Although the Court never officially adopted the rules, they are generally followed.

Taxing & Spending

Lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States

Necessary and Proper Clause

Make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Residency requirement(house)

Must live in the state of representation

Residency requirement(senate)

Must live in the state of representation

14th Amendment

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Limit on the size of constituency(house)

No more than one Representative per 30,000 people

Regulation of Armed Forces

Oversee land and naval Forces

Patents & Copyrights

Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts (through copywriting and patenting)

Navy

Provide and maintain a Navy

Militia

Provide for calling forth the Militia to execute US laws, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

Regulations for Militia

Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia

Counterfeiting

Punish counterfeiting

Commerce

Regulate Commerce (foreign Nations, among States, Indian Tribes)

Second Amendment

Right to bear arms

what does article 3 of the constitution say?

Section 1 establishes the Supreme Court and reiterates the power granted to Congress in Article 1 Section 8 to establish inferior courts. Note that the Constitution does not mention the number of judges required for the top Court. That decision is left to Congress, and the number has changed throughout U.S. history, beginning at six justices and increasing to as many as 10 during Civil War times. Following the Civil War, the size of the Court was set at nine justices where it remains today.

Constitution Day

September 17, 1787

Compelling Government Interest

Sherbert v. Verner (1963) set forth the Compelling Interest Test and stated that if a state regulation burdens a person's free exercise of religion, the government must show a compelling government interest and the least restrictive means possible to achieve its goal(s). (The concepts of "compelling government interest" and "least restrictive means" are discussed within the context of judicial scrutiny below.) This case concerned religious group members' right to refuse to work on their Sabbath without incurring negative economic reprisals. The Court retreated somewhat from this test in the case of Employment Division v. Smith (1990). The Court narrowed the Sherbert ruling by stating that the use of peyote for religious purposes was considered criminal in the state, and therefore was grounds for denial of unemployment benefits. In other words, the Free Exercise Clause did not prevent the state from administering generally applicable regulations that have incidental effects on religious practices.

Declaration of Independence

Signed in 1776 by US revolutionaries; it declared the United States as a free state.

Religious Displays on Public Property

Stone v. Graham (1980) the Court ruled that posting the 10 Commandments in schools was unconstitutional. The Court said: The pre-eminent purpose for posting the Ten Commandments on schoolroom walls is plainly religious in nature. The Ten Commandments are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths, and no legislative recitation of a supposed secular purpose can blind us to that fact. The Commandments do not confine themselves to arguably secular matters, such as honoring one's parents, killing or murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, and covetousness. Rather, the first part of the Commandments concerns the religious duties of believers: worshipping the Lord God alone, avoiding idolatry, not using the Lord's name in vain, and observing the Sabbath Day.

Article VI

Supremacy Clause-It discusses debt from the Revolutionary War in the first clause, and oaths of office and religious tests in the third, and is probably best known for its reference to the supremacy of national laws found in Clause 2.

"the power to tax involves the power to destroy

Taxing a constitutionally justified federal entity would interfere with a legitimate power of Congress and put the state at odds with the federal government, thus violating the Supremacy Clause.

Ashwander Rules

The Ashwander rules have become a means for determining what the court can review, as set forth in the case of Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority (1936).

Sixteenth Amendment

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Section 2, Clause 2

The Constitution also grants the president the power to enter into treaties with other nations, and to appoint ambassadors, Supreme Court judges, and other officials to various posts, with the advice and consent of the Senate

Court Jurisdiction

The Court may determine that a case falls outside its jurisdiction. Even if parties attempt to take their case to court, this does not necessarily mean the court must arbitrate that issue. Article III clearly outlines what areas the Supreme Court may rule on, including controversies described below: Where the United States is a party Between two or more States Between a state and citizens of another state (see the note below about the 11th Amendment) Between citizens of different States Between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states Between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens, or subjects

Employment Division v. Smith (1990)

The Court narrowed the Sherbert ruling by stating that the use of peyote for religious purposes was considered criminal in the state, and therefore was grounds for denial of unemployment benefits. In other words, the Free Exercise Clause did not prevent the state from administering generally applicable regulations that have incidental effects on religious practices.

How does Section 9 of Article I limit Congress?

The First Clause, related to a highly controversial topic, prohibits Congress from banning the importation of slaves before the year 1808, which allowed this practice to continue for 20 years. The clause only applied to those states already existing, meaning Congress could ban importation in future states. In addition, the section allowed Congress to tax state imports. Ultimately, slave importation was banned on January 1, 1808, as the Constitution allowed, although slavery itself (and illegal importation) would continue until the adoption of the 13th Amendment following the Civil War.

First Continental Congress.

The First Continental Congress was a meeting of delegates from 12 of the 13 British colonies that became the United States.

Dred Scott case (1857)

The Fugitive Slave Clause was used as part of the Supreme Court's justification for declaring slaves to be property without constitutional protections

Ratification Clause

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same." While the requisite threshold of nine states actually represents less than three fourths of the 13 existing states at the time—which would be an irony given the three-fourths vote threshold to approve Constitutional changes as outlined in Article V—it did represent three-fourths of the states that participated in the Constitutional Convention

Second Continental Congress

The Second Continental Congress was a meeting of delegates from the Thirteen Colonies in America which united in the American Revolutionary War.

Presiding Officer(senate)

The Vice President of the United States serves as President of the Senate.

Espionage Act

The act outlawed the following: any interference with military operations, supporting the enemies of the United States, promoting rebellion in the military, and obstructing the draft. Charles Schenck was an antiwar activist, who, as secretary of the Socialist Party, had overseen efforts to send leaflets to thousands of potential draftees encouraging them to resist the draft. He was convicted for violating the Espionage Act, and the case went to the Supreme Court.

25th Amendment

The amendment declares that when a vacancy occurs in the presidency, the vice president does indeed become president. Furthermore, vacancies in the vice presidency are filled by a nomination from the president, who then must gain approval from both houses of Congress. Finally, if the president becomes incapacitated or otherwise unable to discharge the duties of the office, either through self-determination, or as a result of a majority of his cabinet and the vice president signing a written declaration to that effect, the vice president serves as acting president for length of the president's incapacitation.

22nd Amendment

The amendment limits presidential service to two terms, consecutive or not.

judicial restraint

The executive and legislative branches of government can use various checks and balances to limit judicial power, and the judicial branch often constrains its own power by using various forms of judicial restraint. Judicial restraint refers to a narrowing of judicial power or limiting matters on which the Court will rule

how did the government exist under the constitution?

The existing government under the Articles consisted of just one branch, the Congress, which was a single (also known as unicameral) chamber.

Article V, Clause 2

The first says "no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article...."

compelling state interest

The government bears the entire burden of proving a compelling state interest. In other words, the Court doesn't automatically assume the need for a regulation simply because the government makes the claim.

How is the president elected?

citizens cast their votes for President of the United States every four years, but the president is actually elected by electors through the Electoral College system.

Section 1, Clause 2

The number of electors for each state is determined by adding together the number of House and Senate members

why did the founding fathers support a republican form of government?

The overriding issue may have been to create a form of government in which the rulers themselves would be ruled, not by other men, but by a body of laws in a constitution. John Adams, the second president of the United States, famously declared in "The Letters to Novanglus" that a republic was "a nation of laws, not of men," or as the revolutionary author Thomas Paine put it in his influential book Common Sense, "In America, the law is king."

Exclusionary Rule

The rule says that any evidence obtained from an illegal search must be excluded from criminal proceedings on the basis of the Fourth Amendment, as well as the Fifth Amendment's provision against self-incrimination, though more recent court rulings allow for a "good faith exception" to the Exclusionary Rule.

separation of powers

The separation of powers is a representation for the governance of a state. Under this model, a state's government is divided into branches, each with separate, independent powers and responsibilities so that powers of one branch are not in conflict with those of the other branches

Doctrine of Incorporation

This doctrine is based on the 14th Amendment's guarantee of due process and equal protection under the law for citizens in all states.

Section 1, Clause 3

This means that two thresholds must be met: 1) a candidate must get the most electoral votes, and 2) a candidate must get a majority of electoral votes. The candidate who meets both of these thresholds becomes president, with the second-place finisher becoming vice president under the original Constitution.

Mootness

This refers to factual developments that end a conflict between parties. For instance, a filed case may take years to work its way through the court system. While doing so, if something happens to make continuing the case useless or purely academic, the case becomes moot.

Miller v. California (1973)

This resulted in a three-step definition of pornography as the following: If the work (a) applies contemporary standards and finds that the work appeals to a prurient interest in sex; (b) if the work depicts offensive sexual conduct as defined by the applicable law or authority; and (c) if the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, then it is not protected. This test has resulted in hard-core pornography as the only unprotected form of speech, though, as described in the first step in Miller, what is considered obscene ultimately changes as the standards of society change. In addition, Child Pornography falls under the definition of obscenity, though virtual child pornography was actually upheld by the Court as protected speech in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002).

why did jefferson want a bill of rights in the constitution?

Thomas Jefferson, in a December 1787 letter addressed to Madison, saw the lack of a Bill of Rights as one chief problem with the proposed Constitution. In Jefferson's view, such a bill was "what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

why did robert yates disagree with hamilton's argument against a bill of rights in the constitution?

Those who have governed, have been found in all ages ever active to enlarge their powers and abridge the public liberty. This has induced the people in all countries, where any sense of freedom remained, to fix barriers against the encroachments of their rulers. In other words, even if the Constitution grants no power to restrain the press, as Hamilton points out, sooner or later, someone in the government will want to do it. Better to have a safeguard now to avoid being sorry later.

what 3 functions did john locke believe the government should serve?

To legislate (make laws) To execute (enforce laws) To judge (interpret laws)

article 1 section 28th clause

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer there of.

Why did Hamilton want a national bank?

To strengthen the power of the central government

Northwest Ordinance of 1787

Usually the state-admittance process begins with Congress passing an enabling act allowing the residents of a territory to draft a state constitution, which must then be submitted to Congress for approval.

Constitution of the United States

What emerged from the Convention was a new governing document that replaced the problematic Articles of Confederation.

why did hamilton oppose a bill of rights in the constitution?

[It] would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colourable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?

bill of attainder

a Congressional law that singles out one or more persons for immediate conviction and punishment without due process. It results in a sort of "trial by legislature," which violates the concept of separation of powers since trial and conviction are part of the judiciary function.

Scarsdale v. McCreary (1985)

a city could not ban a nativity scene on public property that otherwise allowed expressive displays because this violates free speech principles under the First Amendment, even if the city's motivation for such a ban was its desire to avoid running afoul of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

County of Allegheny v. ACLU (1989)

a heavily divided Court narrowly struck down a nativity scene displayed on the main staircase of a public building and upheld a Hanukkah menorah shown alongside a Christmas tree outside a public building.

Bicameral Congress

a legislative body separated into two chambers.

Poe v. Ullman (1961)

a married couple filed suit against a Connecticut law that banned the use of contraceptive devices. While the Court ultimately decided that the couple lacked standing to bring the case because they had not actually been charged with violating the law—a majority of the Court held that mere threat of enforcement does not make a case "ripe" for the Court to decide—a dissenting opinion by Justice Harlan has had lasting impact on the Court's view of liberty and the concept of substantive due process. Justice Harlan wrote: [T]he full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the due process clause cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution. This "liberty" is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to keep and bear arms; the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on. It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints. (Poe v. Ullman, 1961)

Blaine Amendment

a proposal put forward by Congressman James Blaine in 1875, would have said, "No State shall make any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Although the measure passed in the House, it fell short in the Senate and was thus never sent to the states for ratification. Despite the lack of an official amendment, the prohibition against state churches was made possible by the Doctrine of Incorporation.

Alden v. Maine (1999),

a sharply divided Court ruled that states do possess sovereign immunity per the Constitution itself without regard to the 11th Amendment. As such, Congress cannot use a justification under the Necessary and Proper Clause to abrogate a state's immunity.

confederation

a system of governance where the majority of power rests with the states or local governing entities within a country.

least restrictive means

achieving the result. In other words, the regulation cannot be overly broad. The government must show that the regulation serves the compelling interest specifically and that it will achieve the desired result (i.e., public safety) with the least amount of interference possible. Recall that this was the requirement in the Sherbert case. Again, the onus is on the government to live up to these criteria.

Shay's Rebellion

added momentum to calls for reforming the existing governing document

23rd Amendment

added three electors for Washington, D.C. since it exists outside of any state boundaries and thus, is not provided any electors by the Constitution.

New Jersey Plan

agreed in principle to a national government with three separate branches, legislative, executive and judicial, as the Virginia Plan proposed. However, the New Jersey approach maintained the unicameral Congress with equal state suffrage that existed under the Articles. This would ensure that the voice of smaller states like New Jersey, which itself was 25% the size of Virginia in population, continued to carry the same weight in Congress relative to the larger states. As you might imagine, the large states were not interested in New Jersey's proposal.

Privileges and Immunities Clause and the Due Process Clause,

both of which have parallels elsewhere in the Constitution: the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Representation(districts)

by population(via districts)

War Powers Act

an attempt to restore the check, at least to some degree. The resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing any U.S. armed forces to military action. It also states that without a declaration of war or authorization of military force approved by Congress, the troops can only be deployed for 60 days (with a 30-day withdrawal period, which essentially can amount to 90 total days of deployment).

Origination Clause

any revenue-related bills must originate in the House, although the Senate has unlimited ability to amend such bills. Neither house can adjourn for more than three days without the approval of the other.

McCulloch v. Maryland

applied the more expansive view. The larger impact of the ruling was (a) per the Necessary and Proper Clause, Congress has Implied Powers

Dennis v. United States (1951)

applying the Clear and Present Danger Doctrine.

Federal Farmer, No. 4

argued that making changes would prove extremely difficult when the balance of political power shifts from the many to the few. Unless certain powerful interests supported an amendment, the people themselves would never be able to change the Constitution.

Charles Montesquieu

argued that the independence of the judicial power from the legislative and executive powers was absolutely essential to a free and just government.

Marbury v. Madison

begins with the presidential election of 1800, when President John Adams, a Federalist, lost his reelection bid to Vice President Thomas Jefferson, his rival and a Democratic Republican. While Jefferson was still president elect—meaning he had won the election but had not yet taken office—Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801 that expanded the number of federal courts and gave the president the authority to appoint federal judges. As a last-ditch attempt to disrupt the incoming Jefferson administration, Adams used this newly acquired power to appoint a total of 58 Federalist judges right before leaving office. These were known as the "midnight judges," as Adams was said to have signed their appointments in the middle of the night before Jefferson's inauguration as president. The Senate approved the appointments, but the commissions had to be formally delivered before they could technically go into effect. The delivery task fell first to John Marshall, who was serving as Adams' Secretary of State, even though Adams had appointed Marshall Chief Justice of the Supreme Court with the midnight appointments. While many of the commissions were delivered during the short time remaining in Adams' term, some were not. Marshall assumed that Thomas Jefferson's incoming Secretary of State, James Madison, would deliver the remaining commissions, and all would be well. Instead, upon taking office, Thomas Jefferson ordered Levi Lincoln, who was acting Secretary of State until Madison's arrival, not to deliver the commissions, which meant the appointees could not take their positions. William Marbury, an ardent Federalist from Maryland, lost a commission due to this decision. Suffice it to say, Marbury was not happy. Relying on a provision included in the Judiciary Act of 1789 that gave the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over writs of mandamus (a writ of mandamus is essentially an "order" from the Court directing a government official to fulfill their official duties or fix an abuse of discretion), Marbury took his case directly to the Supreme Court and insisted on such a writ to compel the Jefferson administration to deliver his commission and make him a federal judge. Before the Supreme Court took up the matter of whether to issue the writ, the Court determined it had to first decide whether it had jurisdiction in the case. The writs of mandamus power is not a part of those areas listed in Article III where the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction so the Court was first going to determine whether Congress was allowed to expand the original jurisdiction powers granted to the Supreme Court beyond what was laid out in Article III of the Constitution, as it had done in the Judiciary Act of 1789.

ex post-facto law

concerns laws passed by Congress that retroactively declare a particular action illegal after the fact (Ex post facto is Latin for "after the fact"). In other words, Congress cannot change the legal consequences of actions that were committed prior to the enactment of the law, thus criminalizing actions that were legal at the time they were committed.

President's Cabinet

consists of the vice president and the heads of the major federal departments, such as the Department of Defense, Department of State, etc. Finally,

Article IV

created stronger regulations for the relationship between the states. This article also establishes certain obligations the federal government has to the states.

article V

creates a check for the states against the power of the federal government, as well as a potential check for Congress against constitutional interpretations by the Supreme Court: the constitutional amendment. Amending the Constitution by the process outlined in Article V is not easy, but it has happened 27 times in the nation's history.

14th Amendment

declared that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.

10th Amendment

declares that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989)

established that the government can create "time, place, and manner" restrictions on speech provided that a) such restrictions are content-neutral, meaning they are not based on the content of the speech, b) they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and c) plenty of alternate communication modes are available. Time, place, or manner regulations focus not on what is said but on when, where, and how loud.

federalism

divides power somewhat evenly between the central government and state governments. This form of government allows the central government to have more powers than under a confederate government setup, where states maintain considerable powers relative to the central government

Commercial speech

does not enjoy the same protection as political or private speech, but it does enjoy some protection. This generally involves advertising on television or in newspapers. The Court can limit any false advertising, and the government has the right to regulate various industries as long as they are no more excessive than necessary.Finally, Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989) established that the government can create "time, place, and manner" restrictions on speech provided that a) such restrictions are content-neutral, meaning they are not based on the content of the speech, b) they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and c) plenty of alternate communication modes are available. Time, place, or manner regulations focus not on what is said but on when, where, and how loud.A recent case brought against the Town of Gilbert, Arizona applied and interpreted the Ward case. The case, Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015), involved temporary signs a church set up each week to direct members of the congregation to the church location. The church was small and often held services at various and changing locations, making such temporary directional signs important to attendees. The Town of Gilbert, which had a sign ordinance severely restricting the time, place, and manner of the temporary directional signs, cited the church for violating the ordinance. The church sued the town, pointing out that the town had less onerous and more flexible rules when for other types of signs, like those with an ideological or political message, which had separate standards. The District and Ninth Circuit courts upheld Gilbert's regulation, pointing out that the Ward case allows for time, place, and manner restrictions; however, the Supreme Court unanimously declared the Gilbert regulation unconstitutional, overturning the lower court rulings, because it determined that "The [Gilbert] Sign Code is content based on its face. It defines the categories of temporary, political, and ideological signs on the basis of their messages and then subjects each category to different restrictions." In other words, Gilbert did not live up to the first part of the time, place, and manner test established in Ward because the dispa

Virginia Plan

drafted by James Madison, and proposed on May 29, 1787, by Virginia's governor, Edmund Randolph (thus the plan is also known as the Randolph Plan). This plan proposed a national government with both structural and representative differences when compared to the existing Articles of Confederation. In terms of structure, the Virginia Plan proposed separating the central government into three equal branches with different responsibilities: legislative, executive, and judicial. This was consistent with the Separation of Powers principle. In addition, the plan proposed that the legislative branch be a bicameral Congress.

winner-take-all system

each state conducts an election and the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote in a state wins all electors from that state, is customary. In other words, the individual who wins the most votes for president in Arizona gets all 11 of Arizona's electoral votes regardless of how close the election may have been between the candidates. Nothing in the Constitution, however, mandates that elections proceed this way; originally, electors were chosen by a variety of methods. For instance, some states simply had their legislatures appoint electors, and other states opted for a vote of the people by congressional district.

faithless electors

electors who vote for a candidate other than the one they are pledged to vote for. Because the electors are now, by and large, selected by the political parties themselves—usually as an acknowledgment of an individual's loyalty or accomplishments on behalf of the party—it is rare for an elector to vote for the candidate of an opposite party.

Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)

established that defendants have a right to remain silent and to speak to an attorney before being questioned by police, and incorporated this right to the states.

Mills v. Duryee (1813)

established that the merits (fundamental issues) of a case settled in one state cannot be revised or overturned by the courts of a different state. However, the second case established that legal procedures valid in one state do not need to be enforced by another.

Judiciary Act of 1789

established the remainder of the federal court system. The act created a charter for the federal judicial system by specifying the jurisdiction and powers of the other court levels, namely the district and circuit courts. It also prescribed the qualifications and authority of federal judges, district attorneys, court clerks, U.S. Marshals, and deputy marshals.

Fifth Amendment

establishes that "private property shall not be taken for public use, without just compensation,"

Article IV, Section 2

establishes that nonresidents within a state enjoy the same rights as the residents of that state. The purpose of the clause is to ensure that citizens are treated fairly in states they are visiting or traveling through, particularly when it comes to court access. For instance, if Arizonans have a right to fair trial in Arizona, then Californians (or Texans or Coloradans, etc.) also have a right to a fair trial while in Arizona.

section 1

establishes that the judges "shall hold their offices during good behaviour

Article II, Section 1, Clause 6

establishes that the vice president assumes all presidential powers if the latter should be removed from office; however, whether the vice president actually becomes president in the event of a presidential vacancy or simply takes over the duties of the office as acting president is unclear.

Article II

establishes the executive branch of the federal government

Section 2

establishes the powers of the judicial branch, including what kind of cases can be decided and the judicial branch's jurisdiction

Section 2 of Article II

establishes the powers of the presidency. The first clause of Section 2 is one of the most significant; it establishes that the president is the Commander in Chief of America's Armed Forces.

Section 1 of Article II

establishes the requirements for the presidency. Only an American-born citizen at least 35 years of age, who has been a resident for at least 14 years,

Article VI

establishes the supremacy of the national government, and Article VII discusses the ratification requirements that allow the Constitution to go into effect.

(Section 1, Clause 3)

f a tie for vice president occurs, then the Senate decides between the candidates. When the House must choose the president under this rare scenario, the Constitution assigns each state a single vote, regardless of how many members the state has in the House. For instance, California's 53 House members would have to agree among themselves which one candidate to select with their state's single vote.

Citizen of the U.S.(house)

for at least 7 years

Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) and Murray v. Curlett (1962)

found that the establishment bar extended to school prayer and reading from the Bible. However, the Bible could be studied as history or literature.

constitutional Convention

from May to September in 1787, delegates from every state except Rhode Island, which refused to attend, met in Philadelphia

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

further clarified that these rights must be told to defendants. This case was the origin of the Miranda Warning, which police must give to defendants before interrogating them.

Section 4 of Article IV

guarantees a republican form of government to the states, as well as protection from foreign invasion

Guarantee Clause.

guarantees a republican form of government to the states, as well as protection from foreign invasion.

district court

has original jurisdiction. District court is generally the entry point where the actual trial takes place.

Procedural due process

has to do with due process explicitly guaranteed by the Bill of Rights

Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)

having a moment of silence in school was struck down

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2

he Constitution gives states the power to appoint their own electors as directed by their respective state legislatures

McCulloch v. Maryland

he first legal test of Congress's power emerged when Congress established the Second Bank of the United States in Maryland in 1817. Creating a bank may not seem like a very controversial issue, but when the state of Maryland decided to tax the bank, it became one. The General Assembly of Maryland decided that the bank was unconstitutional since the powers of Congress did not list the specific power to establish a bank. The state decided to levy a tax on all banks not chartered by the state of Maryland to rebuke the federal government for overstepping its bounds. When the president of the bank, James McCulloch, refused to pay the tax, the stage was set for a showdown between Congress and the state.Both sides had initially acknowledged that the Constitution does not grant Congress the authority to establish a bank. However, Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in his opinion supporting McCulloch that the Necessary and Proper Clause can—even must—be interpreted as granting Congress just such a power. One of his key arguments was that the powers granted to Congress were so vast and broad that many things would be required to carry them out. On the topic of revenues and finances in particular, areas where the Constitution did grant explicit authority to Congress, a bank would certainly be reasonable. Justice Marshall also answered the arguments of Maryland, which insisted that the word "necessary" limited Congress to only what was absolutely necessary for the carrying out of the law. You may judge whether you find Marshall's thinking persuasive:If reference be had to its use, in the common affairs of the world, or in approved authors, we find that it frequently imports no more than that one thing is convenient, or useful, or essential to another. To employ the means necessary to an end, is generally understood as employing any means calculated to produce the end, and not as being confined to those single means, without which the end would be entirely unattainable. (McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819)

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago (Chicago B. & Q.R. Co. v. Chicago, 1897)

he issue before the Court was whether the city of Chicago could appropriate private property without fair compensation. The city had taken land from a railroad company and only paid the company a single dollar as compensation. In this case, the Court held that the railroad company had a 14th Amendment right to due process, which included fair compensation for any land appropriated by the state or local government. Justice John Harlan wrote the majority opinion, stating: In our opinion, a judgment of a state court, even if it be authorized by statute, whereby private property is taken for the state or under its direction for public use, without compensation made or secured to the owner, is, upon principle and authority, wanting in the due process of law required by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and the affirmance of such judgment by the highest court of the state is a denial by that state of a right secured to the owner by that instrument (Chicago B. & Q.R. Co. v. Chicago, 1897).

Original jurisdiction

he power to hear a case for the first time and rule on it

what did madison say in federalist 51 about Separation of Powers?

he said, "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions....

Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974)

however, the Court clarified the defamation protection when the plaintiff is a private person. The opinion stated that one only needed to show that false statements were published negligently rather than with malice. This decision altered the public figure doctrine, and said that False Statements of Fact are not protected. Furthermore, the case held that liability needed to rest on a standard of fault, and all compensatory damages rested on proved, not presumed, injury.

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

incorporated the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms to the states, four of the justices used the Due Process Clause as their justification, while Justice Clarence Thomas based his stance on the Privileges and Immunities Clause. The end result was that the Second Amendment was incorporated by a 5-4 majority, even though the justices were not unified in their reasoning (although some part of the 14th Amendment provided the rationale).

Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015)

involved temporary signs a church set up each week to direct members of the congregation to the church location. The church was small and often held services at various and changing locations, making such temporary directional signs important to attendees. The Town of Gilbert, which had a sign ordinance severely restricting the time, place, and manner of the temporary directional signs, cited the church for violating the ordinance. The church sued the town, pointing out that the town had less onerous and more flexible rules when for other types of signs, like those with an ideological or political message, which had separate standards. The District and Ninth Circuit courts upheld Gilbert's regulation, pointing out that the Ward case allows for time, place, and manner restrictions; however, the Supreme Court unanimously declared the Gilbert regulation unconstitutional, overturning the lower court rulings, because it determined that "The [Gilbert] Sign Code is content based on its face. It defines the categories of temporary, political, and ideological signs on the basis of their messages and then subjects each category to different restrictions." In other words, Gilbert did not live up to the first part of the time, place, and manner test established in Ward because the disparate treatment of the signs was not content neutral. The regulation was unconstitutionally based on the topics or ideas of the signs.

Defamation of character

involves publishing damaging information about a public figure. Generally, defamation is further divided into damaging words in print, which is called libel, and those that are orally spoken, which are considered slander. In the landmark case of New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), the Court held that a damaging comment about a public official is protected even if untrue, unless the comment was made with actual malice. In Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), however, the Court clarified the defamation protection when the plaintiff is a private person. The opinion stated that one only needed to show that false statements were published negligently rather than with malice. This decision altered the public figure doctrine, and said that False Statements of Fact are not protected. Furthermore, the case held that liability needed to rest on a standard of fault, and all compensatory damages rested on proved, not presumed, injury.

Fighting words

is a category of unprotected speech. In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the Court reviewed the constitutionality of punishing fighting words and/or epithets designed to cause emotional harm or trigger a hostile reaction. Justice Murphy wrote that lewdness, profanity, libel, obscenity, and fighting words are unprotected expression as they provoke a particularly negative response by others and "are likely to cause a fight." In addition, Threatening Speech, which is speech legitimately believed to be a threat of violence, is not protected via Virginia v. Black (2003).

electors

known as the electoral college

Elected by(before 17th amendment)

legislature

strict scrutiny

means the Court takes an exceptionally close look at the government regulation that interferes with individual liberties or rights.

11th Amendment

mentioned above, Article III allows for the Court to rule in controversies between a state and citizens of another state.

School Prayer and Bible Reading

n Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Court ruled that prayer in schools was unconstitutional. The dual cases of Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) and Murray v. Curlett (1962) found that the establishment bar extended to school prayer and reading from the Bible. However, the Bible could be studied as history or literature. In Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000), the Court ruled that public prayer before a football game was unconstitutional. Even having a moment of silence in school was struck down in Wallace v. Jaffree (1985) because it was primarily meant to encourage prayer.

20th Amendment

named January 20 as the starting date (the 20th Amendment also established that Congressional terms start on January 3).

Chisholm v. Georgia

one of the earliest major court cases. The case stemmed from a lawsuit filed against the state of Georgia by the estate of a South Carolina businessman who had passed away. The suit maintained that the state of Georgia owed the estate money for supplies the businessman sold to Georgia during the Revolutionary War. Georgia refused to appear in court, claiming sovereign immunity as a state.

Powell v. Alabama (1932)

one of the first cases in which the Supreme Court reversed a state decision on the grounds the state had violated a provision in the Bill of Rights. This was a widely publicized and notorious case in which two White women accused nine Black men of rape. Given the social and cultural attitudes of the time, the Black defendants found it nearly impossible to receive a fair trial. The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that the trial was fair, but the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the decision, noting that the defendants were not given a fair and impartial trial and that they had been denied access to legal counsel, both guaranteed by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.

Elected by

people

Substantive due process

pertains to the actual content of the laws in question, and whether they are valid in and of themselves.

Section IV of Article II.

power of the Congress to impeach the president

Implied Powers

power to set up a national bank(congress)

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

precisely outlined what is considered a clear and present danger by establishing the imminent lawless action test. The test looks at two criteria: (1) whether the speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action," and (2) whether the speech is also "likely to incite or produce such action." This means that the intent of the speech matters, and also how soon and how likely the lawless action may to take place.

Eighth Clause of Section 1

prescribes the Oath of Office that the president must make when he is sworn in: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning (2014),

presented a major Constitutional question that had never been answered regarding how to interpret the president's recess appointment powers, went before the Supreme Court. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that the appointments were unconstitutional because 3 days did not constitute a significant enough time to equate to a recess. In the opinion, Justice Breyer wrote "When the Senate declares that it is in session and possesses the capacity, under its own rules, to conduct business, it is in session for purposes of the [3rd] clause." Furthermore, on a close 5-4 vote, the Court established 10 days as the trigger point for qualifying as a recess. In other words, the Senate must take a break of at least 10 days before for the president can utilize the power to make recess appointments.

fourth clause

prohibits Congress from imposing direct taxes on the states unless the taxes are proportionally assessed based on state populations.

27th Amendment

prohibits Congress from increasing its own pay during the current term and instead requires any pay increases to go into effect after the next election.

Clause 3

prohibits Congress from issuing bills of attainder and creating ex post-facto laws.

First Amendment to the Bill of Rights

protects several civil liberties. In addition to free speech, this amendment prohibits Congress from passing laws that would infringe upon freedom of the press, freedom of religion, or freedom of assembly. The First Amendment also prohibits Congress from making any law that prevents citizens from petitioning the government for a redress of grievances. In addition, the amendment prohibits Congress from passing laws that respect religious establishments, which has generally meant prohibition of a state-run church, which existed (and still officially exists) in Britain.

17th Amendment

provides for senatorial selection through a vote of the people. This amendment was passed in 1913

clause 2

provides the reason that a person is being detained by the state. A right to a writ of habeas corpus prevents the state from incarcerating a person without a valid reason.

writ of habeas corpus

provides the reason that a person is being detained by the state. A right to a writ of habeas corpus prevents the state from incarcerating a person without a valid reason.

Section 3 of Article IV

provides the rules for the formation or addition of new states.

Ripeness

refers to a dispute not yet ready in its factual development for adjudication. Again, Article III, Section 2 requires that a case or controversy be apparent and relevant for a person seeking judicial remedy.

Rules of Standing

refers to the fact that the Court can find that someone does not have sufficient personal interest in the suit (e. g., personal injury or deprivation of a right) and therefore is not eligible to sue for injury.

Obscenity

refers to unprotected pornography as set forth in the more recent Miller v. California (1973) decisions. This resulted in a three-step definition of pornography as the following: If the work (a) applies contemporary standards and finds that the work appeals to a prurient interest in sex; (b) if the work depicts offensive sexual conduct as defined by the applicable law or authority; and (c) if the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, then it is not protected. This test has resulted in hard-core pornography as the only unprotected form of speech, though, as described in the first step in Miller, what is considered obscene ultimately changes as the standards of society change. In addition, Child Pornography falls under the definition of obscenity, though virtual child pornography was actually upheld by the Court as protected speech in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002).

First Amendment(religion)

relates to religious freedom. Although often described as creating a "separation of church and state," that actual wording does not appear in the First Amendment or anywhere in the Constitution. The amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." Thus, the provisions regarding religion in the First Amendment can be separated into two clauses: the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause.

if the people are concerned about issues who do they contact instead of the president?

representatives in Congress

Advice and Consent Clause

requires Senate approval of various presidential appointments, including Supreme Court justices, heads of departments, and ambassadors. The Senate also must approve any treaties the president enters into.

eminent domain power

restrict but not necessarily confiscate, property for some public purpose. This is called a regulatory taking. Whether a regulatory taking constitutes an act of eminent domain, for which compensation must be offered, or a police action, which does not require compensation, has been addressed by the Court.

Slaughter-House Cases (1873)

ruled that the 14th Amendment should be interpreted on the basis of its primary purpose: preserving the freedoms of former slaves.

Three-Fifths Compromise

s had originally been suggested, slaves would be counted as three-fifths of a person for determining representation in the House, but the same ratio would also apply for determining direct taxation.

legislative resolution of the day

said that the purpose of the monument was to 'recognize and commend a private organization for its efforts to reduce juvenile delinquency,' thus leading Justice Breyer to conclude the monument's purpose was primarily secular.

Reed case

segues into a discussion of judicial practice that, while not prescribed by the Constitution itself, is important for understanding how courts analyze the constitutionality of challenged laws. This is especially true when exploring Court opinions on matters related to civil liberties, which are generally based on the Bill of Rights. (It is also crucial for grasping court decisions regarding civil rights, which are often based on the 14th Amendment.) By now, it has become clear that even though the Constitution guarantees many freedoms, such liberties are not absolute. As you have read, the Court has upheld restrictions on basic liberties in certain situations. So how does a Court justify regulating religion, speech, or another fundamental right?

Sherbert v. Verner (1963)

set forth the Compelling Interest Test and stated that if a state regulation burdens a person's free exercise of religion, the government must show a compelling government interest and the least restrictive means possible to achieve its goal(s).

Abrams v. Commissioner

since the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, it is immaterial with respect to income taxes, whether the tax is a direct or indirect tax. The whole purpose of the Sixteenth Amendment was to relieve all income taxes when imposed from [the requirement of] apportionment.

what does article 1 of section 1 say?

specifies that the Congress will consist of a House and Senate. Sections 2 and 3 outline the qualifications, responsibilities, and unique powers of each respectively.

Fugitive Slave Clause

states that if a slave escapes from one state and goes to another, the other state has an obligation to return the slave, even if the state to which the slave had fled was a free state.

Extradition Clause

states that if an individual commits a crime in one state and flees to another, then the other state has an obligation to deliver the criminal back to the state where the crime was committed. This was meant to prevent people from dodging the law simply by fleeing to another state.

Political Questions Doctrine

states that the courts should refrain from deciding issues that are matters for one of the other two branches of government.

sovereign immunity

stems from the English Common law idea that the crown, which was the head of the government, was sovereign and therefore, could not be sued unless consenting to the suit. In essence, the King can do no wrong

New States Clause

t states that Congress has responsibility for admitting new states to the Union, and the legislatures of the would-be states must approve. In other words, both Congress and those entities (usually territories) wanting to join the union must agree for the entity to become a state. The clause includes some limits, one which prevents already-existing states from creating new states within their borders, and another which prohibits two states from combining to form one state, at least without the approval of Congress.

McCollum v. Board of Education (1948)

that a school allowing outside groups to provide religious instruction to students during the school day on school property was unconstitutional, even if alternatives to the religions instructions were provided to students not wishing to participate.

practicable, but not too easy

to secure due deliberation, and caution; and to follow experience, rather than to open a way for experiments, suggested by mere speculation or theory.

Federalist 84

that the Constitution already contained a number of provisions from the English and Colonial Bills of Rights, such as writs of habeas corpus. He went so far as to say that the Constitution itself was a Bill of Rights. After all, the document outlined those powers that the federal government possessed, the presumption being that if the Constitution didn't list a power, such as the ability to restrict speech or the press, then the government didn't possess that power.

Barron v. Baltimore

the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states; that is to say, the document did not restrict state governments as it did the federal government. Justice Marshall wrote: The constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual states. Each state established a constitution for itself, and, in that constitution, provided such limitations and restrictions on the powers of its particular government as its judgment dictated... If these propositions be correct, the fifth amendment must be understood as restraining the power of the general government, not as applicable to the states. In their several constitutions they have imposed such restrictions on their respective governments as their own wisdom suggested; such as they deemed most proper for themselves. It is a subject on which they judge exclusively... These amendments [in the Bill of Rights] contain no expression indicating an intention to apply them to the state governments. This court cannot so apply them.

Article 1, Section 9).

the Constitution actually does allow for suspension of habeas corpus during times of rebellion or invasion

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

the Court considered the Fourth Amendment's protection against unlawful searches and seizures. Local police suspected Dollree Mapp and her daughter of harboring a criminal suspect in their home. The police entered without a valid warrant. Instead of finding the criminal, the police found pornography in a trunk in the basement, which Mapp claimed had been left there by a previous tenant. The police used antiobscenity laws on the books in Ohio to arrest Mapp, and she was ultimately convicted.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

the Court established a three-part test (the Lemon Test) to determine the constitutionality of providing public benefits to parochial schools. It stated the following: (a) the benefit must be secular in purpose, (b) its primary purpose must not advance or inhibit religion, and (c) it must not foster "excessive entanglement" with religion. The Court has been very strict with primary and secondary schools but more accommodating with religious universities and colleges.

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)

the Court extended the child-benefit theory to accept educational voucher programs for a valid secular purpose and found it neutral towards religion.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)

the Court held that a damaging comment about a public official is protected even if untrue, unless the comment was made with actual malice.

Luther v. Borden (1849)

the Court introduced this doctrine by stating that the power to declare a form of government legal or illegal based on the Constitution's Guarantee Clause (discussed more in the next lesson) was not a judicial question (also known as nonjusticiable), but one of political concern. This case saw the use of judicial restraint and the rise of the political questions doctrine for the first time. The case was used to defer future decisions on foreign and military policy to other branches of government.

Kelo v. City of New London (2005)

the Court provided a more expansive interpretation of eminent domain. The case involved a city that used the power of eminent domain to take private property to sell to private developers. The city hoped to create jobs through the development, but the owners of the seized property filed a lawsuit maintaining that the city violated the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause because the property was to be privately sold instead of for actual "public use" as the Fifth Amendment requires. However, the Court ruled that the city's primary motivation for taking the property was to improve the local economy, which would benefit the public. In other words, the taking had a "public purpose" and thus, could be interpreted as living up to the "public use" requirement of the Takings Clause. The Kelo case greatly expanded the power of government to use the eminent domain tool since the Court relies on a less literal meaning of the words "public use," opting instead for "public purpose."

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)

the Court reviewed the constitutionality of punishing fighting words and/or epithets designed to cause emotional harm or trigger a hostile reaction. Justice Murphy wrote that lewdness, profanity, libel, obscenity, and fighting words are unprotected expression as they provoke a particularly negative response by others and "are likely to cause a fight."

Lynch v. Donnelly (1984)

the Court ruled 5-4 that a city's inclusion of a nativity among its holiday displays, which featured Santa Claus and others, did not violate the Establishment Clause because it merely acknowledged the historical significance of the Christmas holiday.

Capitol Square Review Board v. Pinette (1995)

the Court ruled that Ohio officials' decision to prevent the Ku Klux Klan from displaying a cross in a public plaza where private citizens were permitted to set up displays violated their freedom of speech and religion rights.

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

the Court ruled that prayer in schools was unconstitutional.

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000)

the Court ruled that public prayer before a football game was unconstitutional.

Reno v. ACLU (1997)

the Court ruled that the federal Communications Decency Act (CDA) was not constitutional because it made free speech burdensome for adults who might want access content others considered indecent and offensive.

Epperson v. Arkansas (1968)

the Court said that a state law banning the teaching of evolution was unconstitutional since no secular reason existed for such a ban.

McCreary v. ACLU of Kentucky (2005)

the Court said that displaying the 10 Commandments at county courthouses was unconstitutional because public officials displayed them primarily to promote religion. Yet, in Van Orden v. Perry (2005), the Court upheld a granite monument of the 10 Commandments that was one of many monuments on the grounds of the Texas capitol.

Yates v. United States (1957)

the Court said that only speech that advocates actual violent actions can be prosecuted by the government. Advocating abstract ideas or theories, even if they might imply sedition, cannot be outlawed. In a manner similar to the Reynolds case regarding religious freedom, the Yates case made it clear that the government would distinguish between ideas and actions.

City of Boerne v. Flores (1997)

the Court struck down RFRA as it applies to the states, saying that the act went beyond Congress's power to legislate because it increased application of the Bill of Right' protections without a constitutional amendment. Even though the Court had used the Incorporation Doctrine to apply similar protections to the states, the Court essentially declared that it alone had the authority to do so, and Congress could not. Consequently, many states responded to this ruling by adopting their own versions of RFRA.

judicial scrutiny

the Court uses when conducting judicial review. The Court applies judicial scrutiny as they examine the balance between constitutional rights and proposed government regulation.

one positive effect on the ratification debates

the Federalists, who supported ratification, could respond to the Anti-Federalists' criticisms of the Constitution by highlighting the various ideals embodied in the Constitution, including popular sovereignty, constitutionally defined limited government, a Republican form of government, federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances. The idea of including a list of protected rights and freedoms for the people was primarily added via the Bill of Rights, after the Constitution was ratified.

Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.

the Supreme Court determined that taxes on income from property such as rent, dividends, and interest constitute a direct tax. They viewed a tax on income from property as being a tax on "property by reason of its ownership," as noted in the case, and thus a direct tax on the owner, which was only permitted by the Constitution if apportioned among the states. This decision made it rather impractical to tax those who earn more of their income from property than from wages (people who tend to be wealthier) and became a motivation for amending the Constitution.

Near v. Minnesota (1931)

the Supreme Court struck down a Minnesota gag law even though the legislation was specifically attempting to prevent printing of "obscene, lewd and lascivious" or "malicious, scandalous and defamatory" material

article 2 section 4

treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The effect of the Good Behavior Clause is that Supreme Court justices can serve lifetime appointments, though many voluntarily step down years before death

Luther v. Borden (1849)

the case was taken before the Supreme Court. As mentioned in the previous lesson, the Court exercised judicial restraint: It ruled that determining whether a state government was living up to the Constitutional requirement that all states have a republican form of government was a political question the Court could not determine and left Congress alone to decide. Since the Luther case, very little activity has occurred in the courts related to this particular provision of the Constitution. However, the Guarantee Clause has come up in state courts with regard to whether the power of citizens to vote directly on state legislation through the initiative and referendum process violates the principle of "a republican form of government."

James v. Allen (1786)

the clause from the Articles was interpreted to mean that any records, acts, and proceedings would be accepted as evidence that those things had actually occurred, but not that one state's judgments would have an effect in another. This changed with the drafting and ratification of the Constitution. James Madison, in Federalist 42, had already complained about the indeterminate nature of this clause, and as a primary author of the Constitution, he would remedy it with a more specific provision.

Taxing and Spending Clause

the congress' most potent power.

Establishment Clause

the greater the likelihood that religious freedom will be more limited.

Electoral College

the idea that the people, albeit through electors, choose the president in a nationwide election is a part of everyday life. However, the Founding Fathers didn't necessarily intend for the process to function this way.

Dual Citizenship

the individual was a citizen of both the United States and the particular state they resided in.

which branch of goverment did the people have a direct voice in selecting they serve?

the legislative branch.

Jefferson's letter

the origin of the reference to "a wall of separation between Church and State" describing his synopsis of the First Amendment's religious protections, which the Court relied on heavily in developing its opinion.

Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)

this case, some school districts have resorted to including intelligent design theories in their curriculum. To date the Supreme Court has not ruled on the constitutionality of teaching intelligent design, though a lower court ruling declared it unconstitutional (Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District PDF, 2005).

Checks and Balances

the point of checks and balances was to make sure no one branch would be able to control too much power,

Schenck v. United States (1919),

the unanimous opinion written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes held that the conviction was constitutional.

what was the purpose of the citizen clause?

to establish that former slaves were citizens and thus possessed constitutionally protected rights, contrary to what the Court had ruled in the Dred Scott case (1857) discussed in great detail in the next lesson.

Hollingsworth v. Virginia case of 1798

unlike a normal bill, which requires approval of the president to become law, Constitutional proposals need only obtain the two-thirds support of Congress to be referred to the states.

United States v. American Library Association (2003)

upheld a somewhat different decision, stating that libraries must block inappropriate sites for minors but allow adults who request access to such sites the right to do so immediately.

Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798

were passed at a time when war with France seemed possible.

Threatening Speech

which is speech legitimately believed to be a threat of violence. not protected in the case virginia v black

Clause 5

who has been a resident for at least 14 years, is eligible to run for the presidency

Great Compromise

would be a hybrid of the two plans: Equal state suffrage would be preserved in one chamber, as the New Jersey Plan put forward and as had existed under the Articles, but a second chamber would be added to Congress with membership based on population, as proposed in the Virginia Plan. The first chamber would be called the Senate, while the second chamber would be called the House of Representatives.