Constitutional Law Final

Shelley v. Kramer - Facts

31 out of 39 property owners in a neighborhood in St. Louis, Missouri entered into a restrictive covenant for a term of 50 years, no property in the neighborhood could be sold or rented to any black or Asian persons.

Shelby County v. Holder - Holding

A federal law that departs from the fundamental principles of federalism must be justified by current needs. The requirements of section 4(b) only impacts the sovereignty of a few states. This is a departure from the principle of equal sovereignty among the states.

Plyler v. Doe - Holding

A heightened level of judicial review should be applied in cases dealing with the children of undocumented immigrants. Children of immigrants did not choose to enter the country unlawfully, and depriving them of an education will contribute to a large disenfranchised underclass of undocumented aliens. Therefore, the law will only be held constitutional if it furthers a substantial goal of the state.

Non-Adversary Suits -

A justiciable controversy only exists if the parties genuinely disagree about what the outcome of the lawsuit should be, otherwise, parties could obtain an advisory opinion by colluding to bring a lawsuit.

Ex Parte Milligan - Rule of Law

A military tribunal may not try a civilian if civilian courts are open and functional. Congress may authorize the executive to suspend the writ of habeas corpus when public safety requires it.

Flagg Bros v. Brooks - Rule -

A plaintiff may not bring a cause of action for a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause based on the actions of a private party. The Fourteenth Amendment's due process requirements apply only to actions that are fairly attributable to the state.

United States v. Nixon - Rule

A presidential claim of privilege asserting only a generalized interest in confidentiality is not sufficient to overcome the judicial interest in producing all relevant evidence in a *criminal case.

Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dep't of Health Holding

A state may require that a guardian seeking to remove life-prolonging treatment prove by clear and convincing evidence in proceedings where a guardian seeks to discontinue nutrition and nourishment of a person in a vegetative state.

Kramer v. Union --> Rule

A state statute that denies the right to vote in school district elections to residents who do not own real property within the school district violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment unless the exclusion of these residents is necessary to further compelling state interests.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke holding

A university admissions program that relies upon race or nationality as the exclusive basis for admissions decisions violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. i. Racial quotas are particularly impermissible The medical school may consider race as a "plus" in its overall evaluation of an applicant, but may not make admissions decisions solely based on race.

THE ANTI-COMMANDEERING PRINCIPLE

A. Congress & state governments can both regulate individuals, but the federal government can't tell state governments what laws they must pass to regulate B. Differentiate from Garcia: Garcia regulates the state as employer who has to comply w FLSA. a. There is a difference between making the state comply with standards vs. forcing them to regulate them

Abrams v. United States - Facts

Abrams and four others (plaintiffs) were convicted of conspiring to violate the Espionage Act of 1917 (EA), as amended in 1918. Abrams printed many copies of leaflets, written both in English and Yiddish, denouncing the United States' decision to send troops to Russia as part of World War I.

Cohen v. California -- Rule

Absent a particularized and compelling purpose, a state may not criminalize a public display of a single four-letter expletive without violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Key to Wickard is

Aggregation i. Though Filburn's actions may have been trivial by itself, his contribution taken in the aggregate with that of many other farmers doing the same thing is far from trivial.

d. Reynolds v. Sims

An indvl's right to vote for state legislators is unconstitutionally impaired when its weight is substantially diluted when compared w/ votes of citizens living in other parts of states EPC requires that the seats in both houses of a bicameral state legislature be apportioned on a population basis

Issue - Should the court scrutinize voting schemes under the Equal Protection Clause?

Answer - Court has held that the right to vote is fundamental and deserving of protection under the Equal Protection Clause. Its fundamental because it is a necessary ingredient of America's representative government and restrictions on the right to vote are subject to strict scrutiny. --> Poll Taxes

Approaches set forth in Youngstown. J. Jackson: Influential Tripartite Framework

Category 1: executive power at its zenith when, in addition to his/her Article II power, Congress has expressly or impliedly authorized action Category 2: where Congress neither grants nor denies authority, the executive is in a "zone of twilight" where power must come from Article II alone Category 3: Executive authority at its "lowest ebb" where President acts in contravention of Congress; president power must be based on power granted by Constitution exclusively to the Executive

Bolling v. Sharpe -

Racial segregation of public schools in the District of Columbia violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Fifth amendment does not contain equal protection clause but discrimination may be so unjustifiable that it is violative of due process. Differential treatment of African-American children deprives them of liberty in violation of the Due Process Clause.

Hammer v. Dagenhart [Old Case] No interstate commerce by goods made by children under 15.

The regulations bear no relationship to the goal of promoting interstate commerce as required by the Constitution. Child labor is a purely local issue that should be regulated by the states. Child labor relates to the production and manufacture of goods, and bears no relationship to the entry of those goods into the streams of interstate commerce. The chain here is too attenuated.

Privilege and Immunities Clause of Art. IV Section 2 states:

"Citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of Citizens in the several states."

SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS AND ECONOMIC LIBERTIES. 5th & 14th Amendments:

"neither the federal nor state governments can take a person's property w/o due process of law."

The Tenth Amendment

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

Slaughter-House Cases - Holding

(1) The Thirteenth Amendment solely prohibits slavery as experienced by Africans in the United States before the Civil War, and (2) the Fourteenth Amendment (which is largely geared towards the protections of emancipated slaves and African Americans) only protects rights guaranteed by the United States and not individual states.

O'Brien Test

(1) it is within the constitutional power of the government; (2) furthers an important or substantial governmental interest; (3) if the governmental interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression; and (4) if the incidental restriction on alleged First Amendment freedoms is no greater than is essential to the furtherance of that interest.

Plyler - State Argues the Following Interests

(1) public education to undocumented aliens will stop them from moving to Texas, no evidence. (2) Would increase quality of public education in the state - no evidence and (3) Undocumented aliens are less likely to remain in the state, no evidence.

Williamson v. Lee Optical

- As long as there is a rational basis for this law, then that is okay for the courts - Here, it is a decision for the state legislature, not the judiciary, to balance the advantages and disadvantages of the prescription requirement. - The court upheld the law, stressing the need for judicial deference to choices made by state legislatures.

Lopez holding

- Congress's Commerce Power does not extend to the regulation of carrying handguns, particularly when doing so has no clear effect on the economy overall. The case differs from Wickard. A criminal statute that regulates guns in a school zone by its term has nothing to do with commerce - Question as to what activities "substantially effect" commerce. The mere carrying of a handgun in no way substantially effects commerce.

Boddie v. Connecticut - Facts

- Filed for divorce but were unable to pay the required court fees and costs for services of process. Claimed financial barriers unconstitutionally restricted access to the courts.

National League of Cities v. Usery

- Involved amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act extending minimum wage and hour restrictions to employees of state and local governments.

Korematsu v. United States -- facts

- One of the very rare cases that survived strict scrutiny. it is within the power of Congress and the executive branch to exclude Japanese Americans from the West Coast war area during World War II when the United States is in conflict with Japan.

McCulloch Why didn't they just place the phrase "charter a bank" in the constitution?

- Response #1: Document was created to last for years to come. Framers painted it broadly this way on purpose. - Response #2: The document needs to be accessible and readable by the public. Cannot be too long and it was not created for just the elites. Listing every single enumerated power would be far too lengthy.

Nebbia v. New York Holding

- Rule: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not prevent states from enacting economic policies to promote the public good, as long as those policies are not unreasonable or arbitrary.

United States v. Virginia - Alternatives Court Provides

- There was a less restrictive means in applying this law. They could have admitted only the students capable of meeting the adversarial method demands. - If it just so happens that more men make it, then this would not be discriminatory. Wouldn't be using gender and sex as a "rough proxy."

Actual Malice Occurs when:

1) Requires the Plaintiff to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the Defendant knew of the falsity of the statement 2) OR acted with reckless disregard for its falsity.

In exercising this spending power, Congress may condition the receipt of federal funds by states subject to the following four limitations: [Dole]

1) Spending must be for the general welfare. (refers to anything promoting general welfare) 2) Is there a constitutional provision that prohibits states from complying w/ condition? 3) Terms of deal must be unambiguously stated - To extent that Congress provides conditions, they must be clearly stated. 4) Germaneness. Needs to be a thematic relatedness between condition and what the government seeks to promote. 5) Another potential factor: Coercion. Coercion comes into play if states cannot possibly say no to the offer on the table.

Governmental Interests in O'Brien -

1) the registration certificate serves as proof that an individual has actually registered for the draft. If it were destroyed, it would be difficult to verify registration 2) The destruction or mutilation of certificates increases the difficulty of detecting or tracing these abuses, and increases the risk that mutilated certificates might be used for deceptive purposes.

Court recognizes three categories that may regulate commerce.

1. Congress may regulate channels of interstate commerce. 2. Congress may regulate and protect instrumentalities of interstate commerce or persons or things in interstate commerce even though they are intrastate activities 3. Power to regulate those activities that have a substantial relation to interstate commerce.

Ultimate test for Incitement Speech. --> Test that permits regulation, punishment, and censorship of incitement speech ONLY insofar that speech is

1. Directed at 2. Likely to 3. Incite imminent unlawful activity.

Types of Preemption

1. Express Preemption - When preemption is express, only issue is whether a statute falls within the area preempted. 2. Field preemption - Court requires a clear showing that Congress meant to occupy a field and displace the states from regulation on that subject matter. 3. Conflict preemption - Where the federal government has developed a complete scheme of regulation, states cannot inconsistently with the purpose of Congress, conflict or interfere with the federal law.

Rationale in Cohen v. California

1. First, Justice Harlan began by emphasizing that this case concerned "speech", and not "conduct", as was at issue in United States v. O'Brien. 2. Second, Harlan also expressed the concern of the Court that section 415 was vague and did not put citizens on notice as to what behavior was unlawful. Indeed, the words "offensive conduct" alone cannot "be said sufficiently to inform the ordinary person that distinctions between certain locations are thereby created. 3. Third, the mere use of an untoward four-letter word did not place the speech into a category of speech that has traditionally been subject to greater regulations by the government. The Court denied to categorize the speech at issue as a "fighting word" since no "individual actually or likely to be present could reasonably have regarded the words on appellant's jacket as a direct personal insult."

Three Important Distinctions between NFIB and Drexel

1. Less burden. Doesn't reflect moral condemnation for a decision to buy health insurance in the same way the government tried on Child Labor. - Basically if you don't buy health insurance it's going to cost you the same amount. Not really a penalty. 2. Drexel had the "knowing" requirement. Lacking the scienter requirement proves less moral condemnation by Congress. Everyone has to do it. 3. The revenue in Drexel went to the Dep't of Labor, in NFIB, the revenue goes to the Internal Revenue Service. More reflective of a tax.

Three standing requirements

1. Plaintiff must allege that he or she has suffered or imminently will suffer an injury [Injury] 2. Cause must be proximate enough that injury be fairly attributable to the challenged action/conduct [Causation] 3. Plaintiff must allege that a favorable federal court decision is likely to redress the injury [Redressability]

Congress may vest appointments in three places:

1. President Alone 2. Heads of Departments 3. Courts of Law

Clinton v. Jones -

1. President can be sued while he is president but the injuries must be due to actions that were taken when he wasn't acting in official capacity. 2. Reasoning does not extend to unofficial conduct. Unlikely that this type of litigation will consume the president. 3. History suggests that a large number of these cases being filed is a remote possibility.

Nixon v. United States Holding

1. The constitutionality of Senate impeachment proceedings is a non-justiciable political question incapable of judicial adjudication. 2. Additionally, in reality, impeachments involve two separate trials: an impeachment trial by the Legislature and a criminal trial by the Supreme Court. Allowing participation of the judicial branch in legislative proceedings would upset the necessary system of checks and balance

Three different approaches to incorporating Bill of Rights as to apply to the states

1. Total Incorporation 2. Selective Incorporation. Depends if it is "essential" to scheme of ordered liberty. 3. Fundamental Fairness. Ask "Does it implicate fundamental fairness"

b. Richmond v. Croson - facts

Any prime contractor that works on city project must devote 30% to minority business enterprises. Included minority group members such as Blacks, Orientals, Indians, Eskimos, and Aleuts. i. City noted that Richmond was 50% black, but only .67% of cities contracts had been awarded to minorities from 1978-1983.

the Texas funding system should not be subjected to strict scrutiny, but rather should be analyzed in terms of whether it bears a rational relationship to a legitimate state purpose. Applying this standard...

Applying this standard to the Texas funding system, no reasonable less discriminatory alternatives exist for collecting revenue for public education in the state.

3) Fundamental Fairness

Approach asks not whether, on facts of the particular case, the challenged state action violated fundamental fairness but whether provision itself was essential to fundamental fairness

THE COMMERCE CLAUSE

Art. 1 §8: Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce w/ foreign nations & among the several states, & with Indian tribes - This enumerated power provides Congress ability to regulate interstate commerce. Known as the Commerce Clause, Congress has the ability to do a wide range of things.

Recess appointments

Article II section 2 of the Constitution provides that the President shall have the power to fill up vacancies that may happen during recess of the Senate.

THE PREEMPTION PRINCIPLE Constitutional Authority

Article VI Supremacy Clause: the Constitution, and laws and treaties made pursuant to it, are the supreme law of the land i. Principle that federal law is supreme over state law. When Congress exercises a granted power, the federal law supersedes a contrary state law because of the operation of the Supremacy Clause.

Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) holding

Automatic distribution of points more like the quota system invalidated in Bakke than the individualized consideration upheld in Grutter. Many institutions continue to use race to get a result. These institutions must use race in a context of holistic diversity rather than rigid, mechanical assessment.

Commandeering Hypo #1: State may not tax interest earned on X.

Based on Murphy, this could be commandeering, telling states what they can and cannot do.

STATE ACTION AFTER SHELLEY v. KRAEMER. Pennsylvania v. Board of Directors Holding

Because the will had named the City of Philadelpha as a trustee, and the board was composed of city officials, the Court found that the Bard is an "agency of the state".

F. Missouri Gaines v. Canada

Black applicant was refused admission to University of Missouri Law because of his race Court ruled that the state was obligated to provide an education that as substantially equal within its borders that they offered to white students.

Garcia - Blackman's rationale

Blackman believes that constitution itself is well situated to prevent Congress from undermining the states. Why? States enjoy representation in the federal government. iii. Thus, the Traditional v. Non-Traditional test was proven not to be feasible - line drawing exercise that proves to be very confusing.

Yick Wo v. Hopkins -facts

Board granted permission to operate laundries in a wooden building to all but one of the non-Chinese applicants, but none of those among 240 Chinese laundry operators who applied for permits.

Printz v. United States (facts)

Brady Act required state and local officials were required to conduct background checks of prospective firearm purchasers. Printz brought suit in federal district court against the United States government alleging that the Brady Act was an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional power because it compelled state officers to participate in federal service.

Palko v. Connecticut (Facts)

CT statute permitting appeals in criminal cases to be taken by the state is challenged by appellant as an infringement of the 14th amendment the Court upheld Palko's conviction on the basis that the Double Jeopardy appeal was not "essential to a fundamental scheme of ordered liberty."

United Building & Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden Facts:

Camden NJ Ordinance required 40% of employees of contractors and subcontractors working on city projects to be city residents.

Lee v. Weisman - Facts

Case arose when the principal of a middle school invited a rabbi to deliver prayers at the schools graduation pursuant to longstanding custom of inviting members of clergy for this purpose. Student raised an Establishment Clause challenge to the practice of prayer at middle school graduation.

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Rights Commission

Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins (the couple) (plaintiffs) asked Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. (defendant), to create a special cake celebrating the couple's same-sex wedding. Phillips refused because he held sincere religious objections to same-sex marriage.

NFIB v. Sebelius Labels it as a penalty?

Chief Justice Roberts- Labels are not controlling for regulatory purposes. Not controlling that the Act called it a "penalty".

The Right of Household Composition Moore v. City of East Cleveland Facts

City invalidated zoning ordinance limiting occupancy of a dwelling to members of a single family, narrowly defined to a grandmother living with two grandsons rather than siblings.

Difference between Commandeering and Pre-emption:

Commandeering - Congress influences behavior visa vi intermediary of the states. [Printz, Murphy, and NY]. Supreme Court sees this as problematic. Pre-emption - Congress writes a law that directly affects the people. States would then be blocked from doing it as well. Supreme Court says that this model is ok.

Bowsher holding

Congress cannot reserve for itself the power to remove an officer charged with execution of the laws except by impeachment. "Once Congress makes its choice in enacting the legislation, its participation ends."

United States v. Morrison Holding

Congress does not have the authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate violence against women because it is not an economic activity.

City of Boerne v. Florida - RULE

Congress has the power to enforce laws to prevent the violation of a constitutional right, but it does not have the power to define the substance of that constitutional right. Congresses aims must be *"congruent and proportional"* in what they seek to enforce.

Printz v. United States (holding)

Congress may not compel or commandeer state CLEO's to participate in the administration of federal programs.

National League of Cities v. Usery [Old Case] Holding

Congress may not regulate or impose restrictions on state governments in so far that they engage in traditional government functions. i. The Fair Labor Standards Act as applied to state employers is unconstitutional as a violation of the Tenth Amendment [OLD RULE]

NLRB Holding

Congress may regulate labor relations under its Commerce Clause power because labor relations have such a *close and substantial relationship to interstate commerce that their control is essential to protect that commerce from burdens and obstructions. The stoppage of operations due to industrial strife between employers and employees could have a significant detrimental impact on interstate commerce.

Wickard Holding

Congress may regulate local activity if that activity exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce. It is irrespective whether such effect is what might used to have been called "Direct" or "Indirect."

Katzenbach v. McClung

Congress may regulate the discriminatory policies of restaurants through Title II of the Civil Rights Act if those policies have a substantial effect on interstate commerce.

United States v. Darby Holding

Congress may regulate the labor standards involved in the manufacture of goods for interstate commerce and may exclude from interstate commerce any goods produced under substandard labor conditions. Congress has the power to exclude articles of commerce that may be conceived as injurious to the public health, morals, or welfare.

Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Facts:

Congress passed the Child Labor Tax Law which constituted a ten percent (10%) tax on the profits of any company using child labor.

Morrison v. Olson -Facts:

Congress passed the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (the Act). Title VI of the Act permitted a court called the Special Division to appoint an independent counsel to investigate and prosecute certain high-ranking government officials for violations of federal criminal laws upon request by the Attorney General.

United States v. Darby (facts)

Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to prevent the introduction and shipment of goods produced under labor conditions that failed to meet federal standards from entering the stream of interstate commerce.

NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.

Congress passed the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) which created the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) (defendant) to enforce federal fair labor practice standards, including the right of employees to unionize.

Bowsher v. Synar - Facts:

Congress retained ultimate removal power over the Comptroller General and could remove this official.

Grutter v. Bollinger holding

Consideration of race as a factor in admissions by a state law school does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment because supporting student body diversity is a compelling state interest [strict scrutiny] Here, the Law School uses narrowly-tailored means to accomplish its purpose because it does not employ a "quota system" as outlawed in Bakke to achieve diversity. The Law School provides an individual, holistic review of each of its applicants and reasons that alternative methods of achieving the Law School's purpose risk sacrificing both academic excellence and other types of diversity in the school.

EXECUTIVE DISCRETION IN TIMES OF WAR OR TERRORISM.

Constitution confers on Congress the power to "declare war" (Art. I, sec. 8, cl. 11), and to raise and support armies and navies (Art. I, sec. 8, cls. 12 & 13) - Constitution confers on the President the authority to act as commander-in-chief of the armed forces (Art. II, sec. 2)

Authority for Judicial Review: Federal Judgments

Constitution is silent on whether Supreme Court & other federal courts can engage in judicial review Authority for judicial review was first announced by the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison.

Reed - Rule

Content based laws that target speech based on its communicative content - are presumptively unconstitutional and may be justified only if the government proves that they are narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests.

Zitovsky - influence of Youngstown

Court applies Youngstown Category 3 - President can solely rely on powers given to him by the Constitution.

No Fundamental Right to Education

Court declined to extend the fundamental interests branch of equal protection to state financing scheme for public schools that created disparities in tax funds available per child. [San Antonio v. Texas]

McBurney v. Young (cyber information case)(holding)

Court does not believe that the right to information is a fundamental right. Cyber information is a recent development - maybe court is hinting that part of what makes something fundamental is a tradition?

PUBLIC DISPLAYS OF RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS. Outside context of public schools,

Court has been more tolerant of governmental sponsorship of religious symbolism

RACIALLY DISCRIMINATORY EFFECT UNDERLYING FACIALLY NEUTRAL LAWS.

Court has declined to find racially neutral laws with as discriminatory on their effect alone. ... BUT, if the racially disproportionate effect is significant enough, a racially discriminatory purpose may be inferred.

can a law that is facially neutral ever rise to a finding of racial discriminatory purpose?

Court has said yes.

United States v. Kras - held

Court held that interest discharge in bankruptcy did not rise to the same constitutional level as divorce. i. Formal difference between marriage and bankruptcy is that only the state can discharge your marriage - bankruptcy there are other ways around it.

Zitovsky holding

Court holds that President has an exclusive power of recognition and that Congress cannot force the executive branch to regard Jerusalem as part of Israel by listing Israel on the passport. Court finds this power based on the Constitution's text, history, and structure, and on functional considerations.

United States v. Virginia - Problems with the VWIL

Court holds that this remedy did not suffice. VWIL was very different. - Students were "coddled" compared to VMI - VMI brand and alumni base not available to VWIL students (Think Sweat v. Painter) - Wasn't its own independent program - These were not equal and thus, separate programs were insufficient.

Kramer v. Union Free School District Facts

Court invalidated NY law that conditioned vote in school district elections in certain districts upon ownership or lease of taxable real property within district or being parents with children enrolled at local schools

Race preferences in public contracting. a. Fullilove v. Klutznick

Court rejected a facial constitutional challenge to a requirement in congressional spending program that 10% of federal funds must be used for businesses controlled by minorities - Negros, Orientals, Eskimos, and Aleuts. i. Appeared to apply a rational basis here. Court held that it was satisfied that Congress had an abundant historical basis for which it could conclude that traditional procurement practices

Moose Lodge v. Irvis -

Court rejected that a private clubs racial discrimination was unconstitutional because the club held a state liquor license. The operation of the state liquor license did not sufficiently implicate the State in discriminatory policies of Moose Lodge to make it "state action."

West Coast v. Parrish

Court reviewed and upheld minimum wage law for women and expressly overruled Lochner era case law guaranteeing substantive due process to contract without governmental interference.

Town of Greece v. Galloway - Facts

Court revisited legislative prayer and the issue of a practice of a series of volunteer clergy to offer prayers at town meetings after Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call.

Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan

Court rules that a municipal transit authority was properly subject to the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Blackman overrules National League of Cities.

Massachusetts v. EPA holding

Court said that this injury was sufficient. The harms associated with climate change are serious and well recognized. The rise in sea levels associated with global warming has harmed and will continue to harm MA. That risk would be reduced if petitioners received the relief they sought.

Sweat v. Painter -

Court strikes down Texas policy that only whites could get a UT law degree. In terms of faculty, variety of courses, and opportunity for specialization, size of the student body, scope of the library, and availability of law review and similar activities, UT was superior and not equal.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey

Court upholds general holding of Roe that a woman has a right to terminate her pregnancy pre-viability, which is derived from DPC of the 14th Amendment Held: A woman has a personal/privacy right to choose to have an abortion before viability without undue interference from the state.

Gertz v. Robert Welch

Declined to adopt NYT test as it applies to private figure plaintiffs... But ACTUAL MALICE IS REQUIRED FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES.

Focus on PUBLIC officials

Defamation law is less threatening to 1st amendment values when it is relied upon by Private Individuals.

Ex Parte Quirin i. Facts:

During World War II, a group of German military personnel attempted to sabotage the American government by secretly landing German submarines on American shores

Economic Substantive Due Process Since 1937

Economic regulations - laws regulating business & employment practices - will be upheld when challenged under DPC as long as they are rationally related to a legit gov't purpose

McCulloch - it's true that it's not on this list but Enumerated powers relate to subsidiary powers.

Enumerated Power - Collect and Lay Taxes. Subsidiary Power - Need to charter a bank in order to help me complete enumerated power.

Crosby v. National Fed. Trade Council (holding)

Even in absence of fed statutes... the law still looks more like Massachusetts is dealing with Foreign Diplomacy. Thus, even without the law on the books, Mass. may have be impliedly prohibited by the constitution to regulate this area. (Field Preemption)

Three Different Incorporation Approaches: 1) Total Incorporationists

Everything in the Bill of Rights applies to the states i. Justice Black ii. Too much subjectivity and discretion when judges pick and choose

McCulloch Marshall's second reply - it may also be that the MD could tax the bank in particular ways. [Issue spotter]*

Example: The bank would have to pay a property tax in Maryland. This would be an acceptable, generally applicable tax that doesn't discriminate, it would apply to all institutions and people in the state, rather than just the US Bank. Why wouldn't MD just tax exorbitantly then? People of MD would then also have to pay a very high tax and would cause other voters to suffer as well, thus which would prevent MD from socking it to the bank. • Keep in mind this was a lack of neutrality problem.

Baker v. Carr facts

Facts - Appellants challenged state apportionment of legislatures under EPC. Baker argued that rural votes counted more than urban votes, and that he was thus denied equal protection of the laws.

THE END OF LOCHNERISM. i. Nebbia v. New York (Facts)

Facts - NY statute authorizing Milk Control Board to fix minimum/maximum milk prices. Purpose of law to correct for market failure (e.g., failure of producers to receive a reasonable return on sale of milk)

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections

Facts - VA residents bring suit to have VA's poll tax declared unconstitutional Rule - The right to vote is fundamental and state regulations on the right to vote are subject to strict scrutiny.

Craig v. Boren - facts

Facts: An Oklahoma statute prohibited the sale of "non-intoxicating" 3.2 percent alcoholic beer to males under the age of twenty-one, but permitted the sale of such beer to females over the age of eighteen.

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

Facts: Hamdan (defendant) is a Yemeni national who was captured by the United States government in 2001 and transported to Guantanamo Bay, a United States detention facility, in 2002. After two years in custody, Hamdan was charged with one count of "conspiracy to commit offenses connected with the attacks of September 11, 2001." Hamdan petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus.

Mississippi Women v. Hogan -

Facts: MUW is only single-sex collegiate institution maintained by Mississippi. Male applicant was qualified for admission to school's nursing program but was denied on basis of being a male

Hypo #2: I produced an Essay that says here's why violence is good.

Fails Immanency. Simply advocating something in the abstract, hard to make an argument that something is imminently going to occur because of that speech.

Hustler v. Falwell - facts

Falwell claimed that Hustler tried to defame him. Also claimed that the speaker intentionally caused him emotional distress.

Prof. Coenen's Fundamental Principal of Constitutional Law

Federal Power is limited in scope but supreme in operation.

Mississippi Women v. Hogan - [Rule]

For a state statute that discriminates based on gender to be upheld, the proponent of the statute must demonstrate an "exceedingly persuasive justification" for the discrimination.

Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. - Holding

For purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment, an action of a private entity will only be treated as state action if there is a sufficiently close nexus between the state and the challenged action of the private entity so that the action of the latter may be fairly treated as that of the state itself.

Approaches set forth in Youngstown. J. Black (majority): Formalistic Approach

Formalistic distinction between legislative and executive power Executive power is power to execute laws passed by Congress Because Congress passed no law authorizing the seizure, the President had exceeded his power

Snyder v. Phelps - Facts

Fred Phelps (defendant), founder of the Westboro Baptist Church (defendant), organized a picket and protest of a military funeral held in Maryland. Phelps and several members of his congregation stood holding signs outside the Maryland State House, U.S. Naval Academy, and the church where the funeral took place. The signs stated phrases such as "Thank God for 9/11," "America is Doomed," "Thank God for IEDs," and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers."

Snyder v. Phelps - Holding

Given that Westboro's speech was at a public place on a matter of public concern, that speech is given special protection under the First Amendment.

THE COMMERCE POWER AND THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. a. NFIB v. Sebelius - Government argument

Government argues that individual mandate is within Congress's power because the failure to purchase insurance has a substantial and deleterious effect on interstate commerce

Texas v. Johnson - facts

Greg Johnson was convicted of desecrating a flag in violation of Texas law.

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld holding

Hamdan is charged with "conspiracy," which has never been recognized as a war crime. Thus, his trial for this offense in a military commission is unlawful.

Christian Legal Society Chapter of University of California Hastings Law v. Martinez

Hastings declined to grant RSO to Christian Legal Society on ground that requiring members to sign a statement of faith and to renounce homosexual conduct, excluded students on basis of religion and sex orientation. CLS challenged on basis that all comers policy violated its rights to freedom of speech and association.

Presidential Election Process Bush v. Gore

Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one's person vote over another's.

Lochner v. New York [OLD RULE]

Held - "The general right to make a contract in relation to business is part of the liberty of the individual protected by the 14th amendment." [Old Lochner Rule]

Yick Wo v. Hopkins - Holding

Here, although the law itself was fair on its face and impartial in appearance, if it is applied and administered to the public with an evil eye or unequal hand, so as to make it unjust and illegal discriminations, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution

Lee v. Weisman holding

Here, because students and parents are essentially obligated to attend the graduation, the recitation of prayers amounts to governmental coercion to participate in religious activities. The school principal, in choosing both the prayer and the rabbi, can fairly be said to have been acting on behalf of the state.

Incitement Hypo #1: What if I want to incite criminal actor but I am just really bad at it....

Here, even if your speech was really wrongful, it wasn't objectively LIKELY to cause the violence. Flunking prong 2.

Moose Lodge Rationale

Here, the Pennsylvania Liquor Authority plays absolutely no part in establishing or enforcing the membership or guest policies of the Moose Lodge, or of any private club that it licenses to sell liquor. The Pennsylvania Liquor Authority does not discriminate in its practices of issuing licenses and cannot be accused of acting so in the present case.

General Applicability in Lukumi

Here, the asserted public purposes are the protection of the public health and the prevention of cruelty to animals. However, the ordinances are under-inclusive to achieve those ends. The ordinances only prohibit the slaughtering of animals for ritualistic or sacrificial purposes. Most types of secular animal slaughtering are still permitted. Thus, the ordinances cannot be said to have general applicability.

R.A.V. holding

Here, the statute specifically applies to fighting words that provoke violence "on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, or gender." Under these terms, fighting words are permissible as long as they do not address one of the disfavored topics. This constitutes a prime example of impermissible content discrimination, and even viewpoint discrimination, under the First Amendment.

City of Boerne v. Flores - Holding

Holding - Congress has broad, but not unlimited, enforcement powers. Specifically, Congress's powers under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment are strictly remedial and not plenary.

Everson v. Board of Education Holding

Holding - It is true that New Jersey may not use taxpayer funds to pay directly for parochial school programs. However, if New Jersey did not fund the transportation of students to and from parochial schools, it would make it significantly harder for these schools to operate.

Morrison v. Olson - Issue - Does a law vesting the judiciary with the power to appoint an inferior executive officer (an independent counsel) and prohibiting removal without cause violate separation of powers principles?

Holding: The Constitution divides federal officers into "principal" and "inferior" officers. - The Appointments Clause requires principal officers be appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, - but allows inferior officers to be appointed by the President, department heads, or the judiciary. In this case, the independent counsel is an inferior officer.

Griffin v. Illinois

Holds that a state must provide a free trial transcript or its equivalent to an indigent criminal defendant appealing a conviction

Sullivan - NEW RULE

If a plaintiff is a public official or is running for public office, he or she can recover damages for defamation only by proving with *clear and convincing evidence* the falsity of the defamatory statements and the presence of actual malice in the speaker.

Lukumi - Rule

If the object of a law is to infringe upon or restrict practices because of their religious motivation, the law is not neutral and is invalid unless justified by a compelling interest and narrowly tailored.

Snyder v. Phelps - Rule

If the speech is public, the First Amendment provides greater protection than if the speech is private. The Court has held that speech is of public concern when it relates to any matter of political, social, or other community concern or when it is the subject of legitimate news interest and value to the public.

South Dakota v. Dole (facts)

In 1984, Congress passed 23 U.S.C. §158, which directed the Secretary of Transportation, Dole (defendant), to withhold up to 5% of federal highway funds otherwise available to states in which state laws permitted persons under the age of twenty-one to purchase alcohol.

New York v. United States (facts)

In 1985, Congress enacted the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act to help address issues of low-level radioactive waste disposal among the states.

United States v. Lopez - Facts

In 1990, Congress passed the Gun-Free School Zones Act making it a crime to carry a gun in a school zone. Lopez brought gun to school and was convicted under the GFSZA.

MODERN CASES OF THE ENFORCEMENT POWER. A. City of Boerne v. Flores -

In 1993, Congress enacted the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in an express attempt to overturn the United States Supreme Court's decision in Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith,

United States v. Morrison

In 1994, Congress passed the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which contained a provision for a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-based violence

United States v. Lopez - New Doctrinal Rule

In 3rd category of activities that substantially affect interstate commerce, can utilize aggregate effects only if the activity that Congress is regulating is in itself an economic/ commercial activity Carrying a gun --> No aggregate Wheat --> Aggregate

Question after McCulloch. If the constitution extends to chartering banks, then it can extend to any conceivable power. Where does it stop? Marshall's response...

In order for there to be a subsidiary power, there must be a legitimate goal. There must be a demonstration that the law is appropriate and plainly adapted to that end.

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board -- facts

Indiana Voter ID law required that any person voting in person on election day, or casting a ballot in person at the office of the circuit court clerk prior to election day, to present photo ID issued by the government.

United States v. Kras - Facts

Indigent challenged $50 filing fee requirement in voluntary bankruptcy proceedings.

INS v. Chadha (facts)

Involved a student from India who's visa had expired. US immigration judge ordered that he stay in the country. Administrative proceeding haulting deportation. House of Representatives then adopted a resolution overturning executive decision and thereby deporting Chadha.

McCulloch v. Maryland Marshall's rationale against allowing MD to tax the US bank

It would allow Maryland to sock it to the federal government and not itself absorb the cost of doing so. There would be a high potential for abusive taxation here. They would be able to tax people that they do not themselves represent.

Rational Basis "With Bite" Review in Romer

Justice Kennedy The amendment seems inexplicable by anything but animus toward the class that it affects; thus lacking rational relation to state interests. Laws that are derived from level of animus though subject to rational basis should be looked at more skeptically. With same sex couple laws, animus is likely to be lingering in the background.

EXECUTIVE ASSERTIONS OF POWER Youngstown & Tube v. Sawyer Facts

Labor dispute led to strike of steel employees. Truman issued executive order directing Commerce Secretary Sawyer to take possession of steel mills to keep them running. Truman argued that through his position as commander in chief, he was able to what he did through emergency executive action

Brandenburg v. Ohio - Facts

Leader of KKK was arrested after inviting a news reporter to attend a Ku Klux Klan rally. The reporter filmed Brandenburg in Klan regalia, burning a cross and uttering speech that was derogatory to African Americans and Jews.

INS v. Chadha

Legislation providing Congress with a one-house veto over an action of the executive branch does not meet the constitutional requirements of presentment and bicameralism.

What justified Korematsu?

Like the curfew order, the same concerns over preventing espionage and sabotage constitute a sufficient "pressing public necessity" to justify excluding Japanese Americans from their homes in particular areas during the war effort.

Eisenstadt v. Baird (facts)

MA law banned the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried persons

Roe v. Wade (held)

Majority held that the Right to privacy was broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. Forcing a woman to keep and bear a child against her will imposes tremendous, physical, mental, and societal burdens. Thus, Court held woman must be allowed to make the choice.

Marbury v. Madison - Does Marbury have a right to what he demands?

Marshall quickly concludes that Marbury DOES have a right. The president signed, and the senate confirmed. Vested legal right.

Virginias arguments sound a lot like -->

Mere administrative convenience, which is not sufficient to justify a law under intermediate scrutiny

Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. facts

Metropolitan Edison Co. (Edison) (defendant) was a privately owned and operated electricity company that was authorized by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to deliver electricity to York, Pennsylvania and surrounding areas.

What if Congress does not seek to remove an executive officer by its own action but seeks to limit the President's power of removal.

Myers v. United States The Constitution does not grant Congress the right to participate in the removal of inferior officers; it only grants Congress the power to delegate the power to remove inferior officers.

What if Congress does not seek to remove an executive officer by its own action but seeks to limit the President's power of removal. Myers v. United States

Myers v. United States The Constitution does not grant Congress the right to participate in the removal of inferior officers; it only grants Congress the power to delegate the power to remove inferior officers.

Planned Parenthood rejected Roe's trimester framework

New framework from Casey was that the state may not place undue burdens on the right to choose to terminate pregnancy pre-viability. "Law is unduly burdensome if its purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus."

Pacific Gas and Electric v. State (Nuclear Power case) (Holding)

No conflict preemption b/c Congress has left sufficient authority to states to regulate electrical utilities for determining questions of need, cost, & other state concerns No implied field preemption b/c Congress only occupies field as it relates to safety;

Gibbons v. Ogden May a state regulate interstate commerce within its borders if Congress also chooses to regulate interstate commerce in the same area?

No. Congress is granted the exclusive power to regulate interstate commerce in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

NFIB v. Sebelius [spending clause] Issue: Does Congress have the constitutional authority to pass the Medicaid expansion provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010?

No. The Medicaid expansion exceeds Congress's authority under the Spending Clause. U.S. Const. Art. I, § 8, cl. 1. While the federal government may condition receipt of money by the states on states' agreement with certain federal policies, the federal government cannot compel the states to enact or administer a federal regulatory program.

FACIALLY NEUTRAL LAWS WITH RACIALLY DISCRIMINATORY EFFECT. If no purposeful discrimination appears on the face of a statute or can be inferred, and there is no evidence of racially hostile motivation by lawmakers, may the statute be held unconstitutional???

No. Washington v. Davis --> disparate impact alone insufficient to trigger SS

Hypo: I walk into Judges chambers over employment and tax statute and ask him to issue me and injunction because my taxes are going up. Can the judge issue the injunction?

No. Why? - Need to have two parties. What is your injury? "I'm sad". - Floodgates argument, a lot of people will be sad and upset. Injury needs to be concrete and particularized. - Also does sound like a "particular individual right" if many people are affected in the same way

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936) (Rule)

Non-delegation doctrine does not bar congress from delegating great authority and discretion to the president of the US in the conduct of *foreign affairs

United States v. O'Brien Facts -

O'Brien and three others burned their selective service registration certificates on the steps of the South Boston Courthouse

Takeaway for gerrymandering and malapportionment

One person one vote is constitutionally required and legislative districts in state governments must be equipopulous. Good faith efforts must be made to achieve mathematical equality.

Massachusetts v. EPA facts

Plaintiffs challenged the EPA over enforcement of the Clean Air Act. Alleged that the EPA had abdicated responsibility under Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases. Injury here alleged was the rising sea levels that eroded the coast line.

Ex Parte Milligan - Facts:

President Lincoln suspended writ of habeas corpus unilaterally. Is he permitted to do so?

REMOVAL OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS. - The appointments clause is silent as to the removal of executive appointees from office. Does the removal power lie solely in the President?

President appoints Officers of the United States, with Advice and Consent of the Senate. Once the appointment has been made however, the constitution explicitly provides for removal of Officers of the US by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. [Bowsher].

STANDING CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR THE CASE AND CONTROVERSY REQUIREMENTS.

Provides that the "judicial power shall extend to a list of enumerated "cases" and "controversies."

CONGRESSIONAL CONSTRAINTS ON APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS. a. Appointment of Executive Officers.

Provides that the president shall nominate and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, Judges of the Supreme Court, and other officers of the US... BUT the Congress may by law vest the Appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of department.

Falwell holding

Public officials and public figures may not recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress due to publication of a parody or satire without showing that the publication was made with actual malice.

United Building & Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden Court set forth 2 prong test.

QUESTION #1. Does the ordinance burden one of those privileges and immunities protected by the clause? - The court answered yes, it interfered with the pursuit of employment, which was considered a fundamental privilege QUESTION #2: Is there a substantial reason for the difference in treatment? - Court set up a sort of intermediate scrutiny and remanded for a factual finding on whether Camden's economic and social ills justified the ordinance

Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper (holding)

Question -- Is there a substantial reason for difference in treatment against nonresidents The discrimination practiced against non-residents must bear a substantial relationship to the State's objective. None of the reasons here met the test of "substantiality" and the means chosen did not bear a necessary relationship to the states objectives.

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minnesota - facts

R.A.V. (defendant), a juvenile, and several other teenagers burned a wooden cross on the lawn of a home owned by a black family. R.A.V. was arrested for violating the St. Paul Bias Motivated Crime Ordinance, which made it illegal to use symbols that arouse resentment based on race, creed, religion, or gender.

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Issue - Whether the Second (2nd) Amendment right to bear arms is fundamental to a scheme of ordered liberty.

RULE - A Bill of Rights guarantee applies to the states if it is fundamental to the nation's scheme of ordered liberty or deeply rooted in the nation's history and tradition - Court found that individual right to bear arms is a basic right, which forms the central component of the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms, and which is deeply rooted in the nation's history and tradition.

Gonzales v. Raich Holding

Raich's activity of growing marijuana for home use can be seen rationally as having a substantial effect on interstate commerce because there is an established, albeit illegal, interstate market for marijuana. The present case is comparable to the homegrown wheat in Wickard Raich's addition of homegrown marijuana to the national scheme, when taken in the aggregate with others similarly situated, has a significant effect on Congress's ability to eliminate the national illegal marijuana market.

No fundamental right at stake under due process -->

Rational Basis Review Must be rationally related to a legitimate government interest. 99.9% of the time it will be.

Eisenstadt v. Baird holding

Right of privacy of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether the bear or beget a child. [Justice Brennan]

Pleasant Grove Rule

Rule - The placement of a permanent monument in a public park is a form of government speech and is therefore not subject to scrutiny under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

JUDICIAL REVIEW OVER STATE COURT JUDGMENTS Martin v. Hunters Lessee

Rule of Law: Under Article III of the United States Constitution, the United States Supreme Court has authority to exercise appellate review of state court decisions.

Shelby County v. Holder - Facts

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibited any standard, practice, or procedure imposed or applied to deny or limit the right to vote on account of race or color. In the states with the most severe restrictions, Congress required any changes in voting procedures be preapproved by either the Attorney General or a court of three judges in Washington, D.C., under § 5 of the act.

Shelley v. Kramer holding

State court enforcement of a racially restrictive covenant constitutes state action that violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper (facts)

State ruled limited bar admission to in-state residents, violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause.

Fundamental Right -- yes?

Strict Scrutiny "Must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling gov't interest" Law is closely connected to achievement of that interest

Sullivan - PAST RULE:

Sue and collect damages if they could show that the speaker was merely negligent with respect of the truth and falsity of the statement.

Washington v. Glucksberg

Suicide is not a fundamental right. Constitution requires the state ban to be rationally related to legitimate gov't interests [rational basis review]

Question: Should individuals harmed by the president be able to sue the President?

Supreme Court has said no. Why? i. Chilling Effect: Might deter the president from doing certain things. ii. Absolute Immunity - Allowed for actions when the President is acting in his official capacity.

Holding in Texas v. Johnson

TX doesn't prohibit ALL burning the flag, but only when it is offensive to others - subject to strict scrutiny. Society may not prohibit expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive.

a. Roe v. Wade (Blackmun) Facts

Texas Law made it a crime to procure an abortion except by medical advice or for the purpose of saving the life of the mother. Roe wants abortion - she's unmarried & pregnant but is unable to receive legal abortion because her life wasn't threatened by continuation of pregnancy

Plyler v. Doe - Facts -

Texas amended its education laws to withhold state funds for the education of children not legally admitted into the country.

Buckley v. Valeo

The Appointments Clause, contained in Article II of the United States Constitution, vests the power to appoint "Officers of the United States" exclusively in the President.

McCulloch Issue (2). If Congress may charter a bank, may individual states tax a federally created bank?

The Bank was created by federal statute. Maryland may not tax the Bank as a federal institution because federal laws are supreme to state laws.

Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye. v. City of Hialeah Facts

The Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. (Lukumi) (plaintiff) practiced the Afro-Cuban religion of Santeria. Santeria requires ritualistic animal sacrifice, and in most ceremonies, the sacrificed animals are eventually eaten. When the Lukumi announced it was establishing a church in the City of Hialeah, Florida (defendant), the city adopted several ordinances that prohibited ritualistic animal sacrifices.

Lee v. Weisman - Rule

The Constitution guarantees that the government may not coerce anyone to support or to participate in religion or its exercise. States involvement in the school prayers violates these principles.

SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS AND PRIVACY.

The Court has maintained and expanded a line of cases applying heightened judicial scrutiny to laws threatening certain rights of "privacy."

Last argument in United States v. Virginia

The Creation of the VWIL - All female program designed to mirror model of VMI itself. Sort of a "separate but equal" claim.

Boddie v. Connecticut Rule

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a state from denying, solely on the basis of inability to pay, access to its courts to indigent individuals who seek in good faith judicial dissolution of their marriages.

United States v. Eichman

The Flag Protection Act of 1989 makes it a crime to intentionally deface or destroy the flag of the United States, except for purposes of disposing of an old flag.

Eichman holding

The Flag Protection Act of 1989 represents an unconstitutional content-based restriction on freedom of expression. The conduct prohibited by the act clearly targets activities that imply disrespect for the flag.

United States v. Morrison - In 1994, Congress passed the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which contained a provision for a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-based violence, even when victims did not file criminal charges.

The Fourteenth Amendment only prohibits discriminatory state action, not private action. The United States government argues that this principle should be overturned and applied to private action of the type prohibited in the VAWA.

Strauder holding`

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from enacting laws that deny any of its citizens equal protection under the law. The very fact that colored people are singled out and expressly denied by a statute their right to participate in administration of the law because of their color is an assertion in inferiority which impedes an individuals of the race equal justice that the law requires.

Smith Rule

The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment protects the right of individuals to believe whatever they wish, but does not necessarily protect the right to act on those beliefs

Terry v. Adams facts

The Jaybird Democratic Association or Jaybird Party was a Fort Bend County, Texas political organization created to hold primary elections and identify candidates that would later run in the Democratic Party primary and general elections. The winner of the Jaybird Party primary had been successful in every general election for over fifty years.

c. Cohen v. California - Facts

The Los Angeles Municipal Court convicted Robert Cohen (defendant) for violating the state penal code prohibiting "maliciously and willfully disturbing the peace or quiet of any neighborhood or person by offensive conduct." He was convicted after wearing a jacket bearing the words "**** the Draft."

Brandenburg v. Ohio - OCA statute

The OCSA cannot be sustained because it punishes the mere advocacy and teaching of violence for accomplishing a political goal as an abstract concept. Nothing in the law distinguishes mere advocacy from actual incitement of imminent lawless action. As such, the statute is unconstitutional.

Youngstown & Tube v. Sawyer (Majority Functionalist Holding)

The President's power to issue an order must stem from either an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself. Here, there was no statute that authorized President to take possession of Property as he did here. Clear that President must have had constitutional authority then.

Difference between NY + National League of Cities?

The Regulation in NY was only applied to the state whereas the fair labor standard act was alongside private actors doing the same thing. a. Its more of a problem with solely discriminating against states since they have power that private actors do not have. b. It's a better constitutional situation where both states and private individuals are compelled to do something.

Clinton v. New York (Holding)

The Supreme Court declares that the line item veto is unconstitutional. To properly execute the legislative process, there must be bicameralism, passage by both houses of Congress, and Presentment, giving the bill to the President for signature of veto. Anything less is unconstitutional. The president must accept the bill in its entirety.

Abrams v. United States - rule

The Supreme Court ruled, 7-2, that the defendants' freedom of speech, protected by the First Amendment, was not violated. Justice John Hessin Clarke in an opinion for the majority held that the defendants' intent to hinder war production could be inferred from their words, and that Congress had determined such expressions posed an imminent danger. (Old Case)

Reed v. Town of Gilbert

The Town of Gilbert (defendant) passed an ordinance regulating the posting of signs in the town. The ordinance created different categories of signs, including "Ideological Sign[s]," "Political Sign[s]," and "Temporary Directional Signs Relating to a Qualifying Event." The ordinance applied different restrictions to each category.

O'Brien Held

The UMTSA meets all of these requirements, and thus O'Brien can be constitutionally convicted for violating it.

Grutter v. Bollinger facts

The University of Michigan Law School followed an unofficial policy that sought to achieve student body diversity by giving substantial weight to the race of each applicant in making admissions decisions, in addition to its consideration of other academic and non-academic variables.

United States v. Morrison Rationale

The VAWA attempts to provide a remedy against private individuals accused of gender-based violence and not state officials. Thus it is an unconstitutional exercise of both Congress's Enforcement powers of the Fourteenth Amendment.

United States v. Virginia - Facts:

The Virginia Military Institute (VMI) was the only single-sex public higher education institution in the State of Virginia. It functioned to train men for leadership in civilian life and military service using an "adversative" method. VMI refused to admit women.

Romer v. Evans -- Problem

The amendment withdrawals homosexuals, but no others, specific legal protection from injuries caused by discrimination. Essentially, Amendment 2 functions to ensure that no similar laws protecting gays and lesbians are ever enacted.

Vacco v. Quil - Holding

The distinction between assisting suicide and removing life-support systems is clear. When a patient requests life-saving treatment to stop, he ultimately dies from the underlying disease or medical condition. In contrast, When a patient ingests drugs to end his life, the medication causes his death and the physician prescribing the drugs intends for that patient to die

Shelby rationale

The drastic measures of these provisions were warranted in 1965. However, there is no longer a substantial disparity in voter registration or turnout between white citizens and African American citizens in the states covered by the formula contained in § 4(b). This coverage formula is based on 40-year-old data and does not reflect modern reality. Congress must justify these restrictions using the current conditions, not those of 40 years ago. Therefore, the provision is unconstitutional.

Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. Rationale

The fact that Pennsylvania granted a monopoly to Metropolitan Edison over its service area is not enough to show that the private company was acting as the state. In the present case, the State of Pennsylvania is not sufficiently connected with Metropolitan Edison's action in terminating Jackson's service so as to make the action fairly attributable to Pennsylvania.

NFIB v. Sebelius (tax) a. Rule of Law:

The individual mandate contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 is a valid use of Congress's power to tax. It was plainly designed to expand health insurance coverage.

Lawrence v. Texas

The liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the right of consenting adults to engage in intimate contact in the privacy of their own homes, which includes homosexual activities.

NFIB v. Sebelius (Commerce Clause) Holding

The mere possibility that individuals will participate in commercial activity at some point in the future is not enough to justify regulation under the commerce power.

New York Times v. Sullivan - Facts -

The newspaper article in question accused Sullivan's police force of conducting a wave of terror against African American students and brutally harassing Dr. King.

Reed - Court held

The ordinance is content-based on its face because the level of the regulation a sign receives is entirely dependent on the message the sign contains.

NLRB v. Noel Canning

The president of the United States may invoke the Recess Appointments Clause to fill a vacancy that exists during any sufficiently long Senate recess. However, here three-day break between these sessions was not a sufficiently long recess for the president to invoke the Recess Clause to make the three NLRB recess appointments.

Humphreys Executor v. United States

The president's power to remove an executive branch official is not applicable to officials with legislative or judicial functions. i. Under Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926), the President has unrestricted power to remove *executive branch officials, such as the postmaster. b. Holding: An FTC commissioner's functions are *legislative and *judicial in nature, and thus, the President's exclusive removal power does not extend to such government officers.

San Antonio Independent School Dist. v. Rodriguez Facts

The property values in Rodriguez's district were far lower than property values in other districts, making the amount collected to educate Rodriguez's children significantly less per pupil than that allocated for the education of children in more affluent districts.

Establishment Clause

The purpose of the Establishment Clause is to prevent Congress from establishing a religion or enshrining religious beliefs.

Michael H v. Gerald D

The right of a potential natural father to assert parental rights over a child born into a woman's existing marriage with another man is not traditionally recognized in historical jurisprudence and is not a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Moore v. City of East Cleveland Holding

The right of related family members to live together is fundamental and protected by the Due Process Clause, and necessarily encompasses a broader definition of "family" than just members of the nuclear family. The tradition of uncles, aunts, cousins, and grandparents sharing a household along with parents and children has strong historical roots and is worthy of constitutional recognition.

Zablocki v. Redhail

The right to marry is a fundamental right, and any legislative attempts by a state to limit that right are unconstitutional unless they are narrowly-tailored to the accomplishment of an important governmental purpose. [Justice Marshall]

Moose Lodge v. Irvis - Rule

The state must have significantly involved itself with the invidious discrimination.

Smith - Courts rationale

The state of Oregon may constitutionally make an exception to its drug laws for the religious use of peyote if it wishes to do so through the legislative process. However, it is not the role of the courts to create such legislative exceptions.

Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co. Holding

This Child Labor Tax is not actually a "tax," as the sole purpose for taxes is to generate revenue for the government. Congress' actual motive behind this tax is to impose monetary penalties upon businesses employing children for the purpose of regulating child labor use among the states. - This tax law represents an effort by Congress to regulate area reserved to the states by the 10th amendment.

Commandeering Hypo #2: No tax payer shall pay for interest owned on a federal bond.

This is different, not telling the states to do it. Looks more like Preemption.

Case and Controversy. What does it mean?

This means that not everything gets heard by the court, only cases and controversies. To qualify as a case or controversy: 1. A matter must be concrete and non-hypothetical, barring merely "advisory opinions." 2. Must involve parties claiming an actual injury that is personal and concrete to them. 3. Dispute must arise neither too late or too soon for judicial resolution, as made clear by the doctrines of mootness and ripeness

Preemption Hypo Government declares that all citizens shall where seatbelts. What if state declares law that Texan's have freedom to wear seatbelts as they please?

This would be a direct conflict with the Federal Law, thus, it would be deemed invalid.

Touchstone in Washington v. Davis

Touchstone is finding a Discriminatory Intent Must show that these effects were intended by the lawmakers. vi. Disparate impact of law wasn't enough to trigger strict scrutiny, and test survived under rational basis review; Court upholds administration of test under EP

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife - Rule

Under Article III of the Constitution, a party does not have standing to litigate a generalized grievance against the government in federal court if she suffered no personal injury other than the harm suffered by all citizens. Injury must be particularized to the litigant.

Civil Rights Cases - Facts

Under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress may only prohibit discrimination by state actors, not private individuals.

Brandenburg v. Ohio - Rule

Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, a state may only regulate speech that advocates violence if the speech is intended and likely to *incite imminent illegal activity.*

McCulloch Why do we allow Federal Governments then to tax state banks?

Uniformity. When Federal Government is taxing, it applies to all of the states uniformly and if there is any wrong, it can be fixed uniformly.

Regents of California v. Bakke facts

University of California Davis Med. School reserved 16 out of 100 places of the class for minorities. Admissions of procedure was challenged by Bakke, white applicant who was rejected even though applicants admitted to the special program had scores lower than Bakke's

Cohens v. Virginia

VA argued that the DC had no authority to review state court decisions & review was not allowed in criminal cases and in cases where a state government was a party i. Marshall concluded that judicial power extends to ALL cases arising under the constitution or a law of the US, whoever may be the parties."

United States v. Virginia - Va argues...

VMI would have to create new barracks and accommodations and adjustments for women.

Nixon v. United States- Facts

Walter Nixon (plaintiff) was a former federal district court judge who was convicted of perjury and sentenced to prison. He refused to resign his commission even after incarceration, and the United States House of Representatives began impeachment proceedings against him.

B. Strauder v. West Virginia - Facts

West Virginia (plaintiff) enacted a statute limiting jury service to white males over the age of 21 who are state citizens. An all-white jury convicted Strauder (defendant), a black man, of murder.

Significant State Involvement in Racially Discriminatory Action - Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority

When a state leases public property to a private entity and forms a relationship of interdependence with that entity, the private lessee must comply with the Fourteenth Amendment's prohibition of discriminatory conduct.

B. Employment Division Dep't of Human Resources v. Smith - Issue

Whether free exercise clause permits Oregon to include religiously inspired peyote use within the reach of criminal prohibition on use of the drug.

New York v. United States - Rule of Law

While Congress may "encourage" the states to provide for the disposal of radioactive waste, Congress may not compel states to enact or administer a federal regulatory program.

Palmer v. Thompson facts

[intent to discriminate alone is insufficient for SS] Jackson, Mississippi has segregated swimming pools but has desegregated zoo, public golf course, & parks this case does not present a situation where Caucasians are permitted to use swimming pool facilities while African Americans are denied access. The City closed all of its pools.

What are the Sources of Congressional Power?

a. Article I of the Constitution Section 8. The Enumerated Powers - Sets forth in the list DEFAULT RULE. Congress does not have the power to do anything unless it is found on this list... unfortunately not always this simple.

THE NECESSARY AND PROPER CLAUSE

a. Congress has the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution any power granted to any branch of the federal government b. The Necessary & Proper Clause is not itself a basis of power; it merely gives Congress the power to execute specifically granted powers. Basically, the Necessary & Proper Clause, standing alone, isn't the best source of power for a particular act of Congress

Preemption Hypo #2: What if states agree with Fed. Government and take it to next level, tells people to wear 2 seatbelts instead of one.

a. Could be the problem of Field Preemption. Indication that Congress wanted to make all the decisions in this area. b. The two seatbelt policy may also be one who's objectives and effects deviate from what the Fed. Government embraced.

Legislative Prayer - Marsh v. Chambers.

a. Court upheld Nebraska Legislatures practice of opening each legislative day with a prayer by the chaplain paid by the State. b. Rationale - Opening sessions of legislative and other deliberative public bodies with prayer is deeply embedded in the history and tradition of the country. Opening legislative sessions with prayer has become fabric of our society.

Obergefell v. Hodges held

a. Denying same sex couples from marriage conflicts with the central premise and right to marry. (1) Same sex marriage is a fundamental right protected by 14th amendment DPC (2) Same sex marriage is a fundamental right protected by 14th amendment EPC

Hypo: Federal Law says all cars must drive on the right side of the road would trump any state law that says they must drive on the left.

a. EXCEPTION -- Federal power can ONLY regulate and pass laws that pertain to certain types of powers enumerated to them. b. Thus, Federal Gov't must be given the power and autonomy to rule on which side of the road people can drive on... If they don't have this power, then it would be null and void.

Crosby v. National Fed. Trade Council (facts)

a. Facts: Country of Burma was conducting various human rights violations and there was pressure on the states not to support it Massachusetts - Passes law which is no longer going to support human rights violations. Challenged on Pre-emption grounds. Issue: What if there were no Fed. Laws on the books dealing with Burma?

The policies underlying the state action requirement. What purposes are served by such a requirement?

a. Federalism b. Liberty - Desirable to maintain a sphere of private behavior in which individuals are free from constitutional norms.

Douglas v. California Held

a. Held that a state must appoint counsel for an indigent defendant for "the first appeal, granted as a matter of statutory right" from a criminal conviction. b. Denying an indigent defendant the right to counsel during an appeal as of right is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Reasons for Judicial Review... [Why should only SC have a say?]

a. Judges can inform the people when legislatures have gone too far - insulates and protects people from the detriments of the representatives. i. Wary that representatives won't always be loyal to the constitution b. Uniformity - laws that effect people uniformly are good. Without Supreme Court review, Federal Law may mean 50 different things in 50 different states. c. Article III is the ceiling of federal court jurisdiction - Judiciary itself is bound by the Constitution; Congress can't expand original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond what Article III authorized

Marbury v. Madison Can the Supreme Court provide a remedy that he is seeking -- The writ of mandamus?

a. Marbury was given legal title to the office of Justice of the Peace for the duration of his appointment. b. Thus, Madison's refusal to finalize Marbury's appointment interferes with Marbury's legal title and Marbury is entitled to a remedy under federal law.

Marbury v. Madison Does the court have the power to issue a remedy? Do they have jurisdiction?

a. Marbury's entitlement to the commission is a legal, not a political, question and thus a writ of mandamus would ordinarily be appropriate b. Supreme Court, however, lacks the power to issue a writ of mandamus direction the President to deliver Marbury's commission

Content Based Restrictions

a. Speech regulated based on what is in the speech itself b. Receives strict scrutiny

How might you argue constitutional protection on the basis of sex?

a. Textual Argument - The Fourteenth Amendment clause itself uses the word "person" and speaks more broadly then just race. b. Existence of the 19th amendment might also inform that the 14th amendment equal protection clause would include sex.

Dames & Moore v. Regan (Holding)

a. The President has authority to settle claims through executive orders where the settlement of claims is necessary for the resolution of a major policy dispute between the United States and another country and where Congress acquiesces to the President's action. b. This was a Zone 1 case. Congress passed statutes allowing for the President to take control of these situations. c. This holding is narrow and does not mean that the President has plenary power to settle all claims. The President has authority to settle such claims where, as here, Congress acquiesces to the President's action.

Three Problems in Drexel Furniture [ISSUE SPOTTER]

a. The tax imposed was exceedingly high, 10 percent on companies net income. b. Imposed exaction only on those who "knowingly" employed underage laborers. Scienter requirement are typical of punitive statutes. c. Tax was enforced by the Department of Labor, agency responsible for punishing violations of labor laws, not collecting revenues. [See NFIB v. Sebelius]

Lucia v. SEC

a. the Court held administrative law judges of the Securities and Exchange Commission are considered inferior Officers of the United States and subject to the Appointments Clause, and thus must be appointed through the President or other delegated officer of the United States, rather than simply hired. b. As "inferior" officers, their appointments are not subject to the Senate's advice and consent role.

Town of Greece Galloway Holding

b. In this case, the prayers at the beginning of Greece's meetings do not violate the First Amendment. While most of the prayers at Greece's meetings were Christian, Greece offered the opportunity to prayer givers of all faiths. Moreover, the fact that the public frequently attends more town meetings than legislative sessions does not change the Court's historical analysis. While a government cannot coerce citizens to participate in any religion, there is no evidence that Greece coerced its residents into attending town meetings to participate in the prayer.

Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) facts

b. Program considers multiple factors but that also awards points (20 of the 100 needed to guarantee admission) to applicants from underrepresented minority groups Court holds that while increasing diversity is a compelling interest, the university's program is not narrowly tailored

I. Brown v. Board of Education Holding

b. Separate educational facilities based on racial classifications are inherently unequal and violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. c. even if tangible factors of segregated schools are equal, this generates a feeling of inferiority w/ respect to status in community & may profoundly effects hearts & minds

Civil Rights Cases - Holding

because all defendants in the cases are private individuals accused of discriminating against African American patrons in privately-owned businesses, Congress acted outside the scope of its Fourteenth Amendment powers.

THE TAXING POWER

beginning of Article I Section 8. "Congress shall have power to lay and collect Tax, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common wealth and general welfare of the United States."

If congress wants to overturn an executive action, must be

bicameralism (passage by both houses of Congress) & presentment (giving bill to president for signature/veto)

Brown v. Board of Education a. Facts -

black children were denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws permitting or requiring segregation by race; want admission on non-segregated basis.

THE TAXING POWER AS A REGULATORY DEVICE.

can be a tool for policy making, incentivizing, and discouraging various forms of behavior.

San Antonio - The analysis turns on whether

education itself is either explicitly or implicitly guaranteed as a right in the Constitution since it is not explicitly mentioned therein.

iii. Without evidence of past particular race-based discrimination, a city may not

enact a plan to provide a race-based set-aside to exclusively promote minority business enterprises,as this does not constitute narrowly-tailored means geared towards accomplishing a compelling state purpose.

Ross v. Moffitt - Refused to

extend Douglas to require provision of counsel in discretionary appeals. Turning to equal protection, it is not an absolute guarantee of equality, but merely assurance that the indigents have an opportunity to present their claims fairly within the adversarial system.

San Antonio - There is no implicit basis for holding education is a

fundamental right. Rodriguez's argument that education is essential to the effective exercise of First Amendment freedoms is rejected.

SC has interpreted Privileges and Immunities Clause as limiting the ability of a state to discriminate against out-of-staters with regard to

fundamental rights or important economic activities

I. THE SPENDING POWER. Spending Clause:

grants Congress the power to "pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States"

Because of Slaughter-House, most of the expansion of the 14th Amendment

has been through the Due Process Clause, and not the privileges and immunities clause.

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States

i. Congress may enact regulations that prevent racially discriminatory policies in hotel accommodations because of the negative effects of those policies on interstate commerce. ii. The unavailability to African Americans of adequate accommodations interferes significantly with interstate travel.

B. The right to purchase and use contraceptives. Griswold v. Connecticut (Facts)

i. Facts: Griswold & Burxton (physician) were arrested & charged w/ giving info, instruction, & medical advice to married persons on means of preventing pregnancy.

Griswold : Holding and Rationale

i. Found that the right to privacy is implicit in the Bill of Rights relying on the "penumbras" of the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th amendments. Amendments create various guarantees and zones of privacy. ii. The association of marriage is a privacy right older than the Bill of Rights, and the State's effort to control marital activities in this case is unnecessarily broad and therefore impinges on protected Constitutional freedoms; this CT statute violates DPC of 14th Amendment

Loving v. Virginia

i. Statute deprived the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. ii. Freedom to marry has long been recognized as the vital personal rights essential to orderly pursuit of happiness. iii. for first time, SC recognized right to marry as a fundamental right protected under the liberty of the DPC.

Allen v Wright (facts + holding)

i. The parents (plaintiffs) argued that the failure of the IRS to deny tax-exempt status to racially-segregated private schools caused injury to their children. ii. The links of causation between the challenged governments conduct and the asserted injury were far too weak here. [Lack of Causation here]

Problem in Richmond

if Richmond had evidence before it that nonminority contractors were systematically excluding minority businesses from subcontracting opportunities, it could have taken action to end the discriminatory exclusion.However, in contrast, there was absolutely no evidence of past discrimination against Spanish speaking, Oriental, Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut persons in any aspect of Richmond construction industry. Such gross over-inclusiveness "strongly impugns the city's claim of remedial motivation."

Palmer v. Thompson Rule

if there is no facial discrimination, likely need both impact/effect & intent to trigger strict scrutiny for EPC purposes

McCulloch v. Maryland (Justice Marshall) Issue (1): Does Congress have implied constitutional power to create a bank?

ii. Answer - Yes. Added to its enumeration of powers is added that of making "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" iii. The power to create a bank ultimately derived from the Constitution's grant to Congress of the general power to "tax and spend" for the general welfare.

intelligible principle

ii. Congress must specify an intelligible principle to ensure that agency rule-making doesn't become lawmaking Congress cannot give an outside agency free reign to make law, but it can authorize the agency to flesh out the details of a law Congress has already put in place. This became known as providing an "intelligible principle" to which the agency is instructed to conform.

Baker v. Carr holding

ii. Court held that the Equal Protection Clause requires all districts to be equi-populous - anything else diluted the voting power of those who resided in more populated districts.

Ex parte quirin holding

ii. The detention of the petitioners for trial by military commission does not violate the Constitution of the United States. iii. Congress and President, under the Articles of War and Executive Orders, may constitutionally place unlawful combatants on trial before a military commission for offenses against the law of war.

Court's influential test for violations of the Establishment Clause

in Lemon v. Kurtzman. Known as the Lemon Test, held that a statute must meet three criteria to withstand Establishment Clause attack. 1) Must have a secular legislative purpose 2) Primary effect must not inhibit nor advance religion 3) Statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.

Clinton v. New York (facts)

involves fed'l statute that created the line-item veto, which allows president to veto particular pats of appropriation bills, while allowing the rest to go into effect.

The Supreme Court has declared that the right to vote

is fundamental & protected under EPC

If the claimant asserts that the law violates due process, the court will first ask if the right

is fundamental or not.

Zelman Rule

iv. While direct government aid to religious schools is often unconstitutional, "private choice" programs have consistently been upheld as constitutional. Thus, when a neutral government aid flows to religious institutions only because of a truly private, independent choice of an individual (such as a student's use of state scholarship money at a religious school), there is no Establishment Clause violation.

The constitution is the only Western Constitution that has a bill of rights that

lacks a provision explicitly declaring equality of the sexes. Only the 19th amendment - explicitly addresses women's equality by proving the "rights of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the US or any state on account of sex."

The constitution does not speak of freedom of contract... rather, it speaks of:

liberty and prohibits deprivation of liberty without due process of law

In the early 20th century, the Supreme Court suggested finding that at least some of the bill of rights provisions are part

of the liberty protected from state interference by the DPC of the 14th amendment

2) Selective Incorporationists:

only fundamental rights (aka only some of the BoR) are applied to the states i. Justice Frankfurter ii. Judges determine whether rights was "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty" and thus required by the due process clause

Terry v. Adams holding

party primaries, whether by political parties or private clubs can constitute state action.

Nixon v. Fitzgerald - Held

president is absolutely immune from civil damages for his official acts.

ii. Yick Wo - Frequently cited for the proposition that the racially selective enforcement of a facially neutral law

presumptively violates the Equal Protection Clause

Nondelegation Doctrine:

principle that Congress can't delegate legislative power to administrative agencies [Article I permits no delegation of legislative powers]

EMERGENCY CONSTITUTIONALISM. a. Suspension clause of the constitution - Article I 9 cl. 2

provides "the privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended unless when in case of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Rogers v. Lodge - Court found

racially discriminatory vote dilution. Examples where Court struck down laws inferring a discriminatory purpose relies on starkly disparate impact and inference of intent from circumstantial evidence i. No black had ever been elected to Burke-County Commission. Facts beared heavily on purposeful discrimination. Here, discriminatory intent could be *inferred*.

Hunter v. Underwood - Struck down facially neutral law that

reflected racially discriminatory purpose. Law disenfranchised all persons convicted of crimes of "moral turpitude" Relies on starkly disparate impact (disenfranchised ten times as many African Americans as whites) and inference of intent from circumstantial evidence

Crawford v. Marion holding

requiring a photo ID is a minimum burden & the state has a legitimate interest that the burden doesn't outweigh

INTRODUCTION TO THE ENFORCEMENT POWERS AND THE "STATE ACTION" REQUIREMENT. The final sections of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments gives Congress the "power to enforce"

such amendment by appropriate legislation.

Griffin v. Illinois - Launched

the "access to the courts" strand of equal protection.

Wickard v. Filburn: Facts

the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, which limited the area that farmers could devote to wheat production in an effort to stabilize the national price of wheat. Filburn (plaintiff), a small farmer, was penalized pursuant to the Act for producing wheat in excess of the Act's quotas.

Pleasant Grove v. Summum - facts

the City of Pleasant Grove, Utah, (City) (defendant) after the City refused to erect a permanent stone monument that contained the Seven Aphorisms of Summum in a public park.

Washington v. Davis

the Court has never adopted a rule which invalidates official conduct that merely has a disproportionate impact on a particular racial group without evidence of a discriminatory purpose.

Town of Greece v. Galloway - Rule

the Establishment Clause must be interpreted according to historical practices and understandings with respect to prayer at government gatherings. Benign prayer at government gatherings has been an accepted practice since the Constitution was drafted.

Zivotosfky v. Kerry -The Court relies on

the Reception Clause, Art. II, § 3, which directs that the President "shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers." Pursuant to this authority, Congress has historically deferred to the president in matters such as making treaties with foreign entities

Problem in Masterpiece

the commission three times upheld a baker's right to refuse William Jack's request for a cake containing a religiously-based message opposing same-sex marriage. - By contrast, the commission ruled Phillips must create cakes for same-sex couples despite his sincere religious objections to same-sex marriage.

Craig v. Boren - RULE

the gender-based classification must serve an important government objective and be *substantially related* to the achievement of such objective. Thus, for intermediate scrutiny, need important gov't objectives achieved by substantially related means

Holding in Clark

the government's regulation of sleeping in public parks is content-neutral. The regulation of sleeping applies to all sleeping regardless of its message or purpose. regulation narrowly focuses on governments substantial interest in maintaining parks in an attractive and intact condition.

Zelman v. Simmons Harris facts

the state of Ohio established the Pilot Project Scholarship Program to provide educational choices to families with children residing in the Cleveland City School District. The program was enacted to help combat serious problems with Cleveland's public schools.

M.L.B. v. S.L.J - Supreme Court Declared

unconstitutional a state requirement that parents pay a fee for preparation of the trial record in order to appeal a termination of custody Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights the Court has ranked as fundamental and protected from state interference by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Slaughter-House made it impossible to incorporate

via Privileges or Immunities Clause

Keep in mind - the Aggregation arguments are only allowed

when economic activity is involved.

Clark v. Community for Creative Non Violence - Issue

whether a park violated the first amendment when applied to prohibit sleeping in Lafayette Park in connection to demonstration to call attention plight of the homeless.

Substantive due process asks

whether the government has adequate reason to deprive or take away a person's life, liberty, or property.