Constitutional Law I

Class Notes

Case Briefs

  1. Marbury v. Madison: 9/3/08 ; The power of judicial review is asserted but not enforced.
  2. Martin v. Hunters Lessee: 9/10/08 ; Court rules that US treaties come before state legislative acts.
  3. Cooper v. Aaron: 9/10/08 ; SCOTUS interpretation of 14A is supreme over all the states
  4. Ex Parte McCardle: 9/10/08 ; Congress can take away jurisdiction.
  5. Los Angeles Bar Association v. Eu: 9/10/08 ; Separation of powers prohibits the courts from engaging in the legislative function of allocating resources.
  6. Honda Motor Co. v. Oberg: 9/10/08 ; judicial review of extreme punitive damages.
  7. Ferdon v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund: 9/11/08 ; Legislative cap on noneconomic damages violates equal protection
  8. Frothingham v. Mellon: 9/16/08 ; Just being a taxpayer is too dilute an interest to give standing
  9. Flast v. Cohen: 9/16/08 ; Standing is a question about the parties, not the issues.
  10. Sierra Club v. Morton: 9/16/08 ; Standing requires a particular concrete injury
  11. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife: 9/17/08 ; The standard for standing.
  12. DeFunis v. Odegaard: 9/18/08 ; Mootness and affirmative action in a law school admission
  13. Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona: 9/18/08 ; mootness, ripeness, and standing: aprudential doctrine jamboree
  14. McCulloch v. Maryland: 9/23/08 ; States can't tax or impede congressional enactments
  15. Schechter Corp. v. United States: 9/25/08 ; Non-delegation, emergency powers, overruling powers under the Interstate Commerce Clause.
  16. Carter v. Carter Coal Co.: DATE ; SMRY
  17. Wickard v. Filburn: 9/24/08 ; eating the crops you grow is interstate commerce?
  18. United States v. Lopez: 9/25/08 ; a "substantial relationship" is required for regulation under interstate commerce
  19. Gonzales v. Raich: 10/1/08 ; if congress is trying to control the drug market, then private activities affecting supply and demand are covered under interstate commerce
  20. Rapanos v.United States: 9/29/08 ; the term "waters" as opposed to navigable waters and wetlands.
  21. Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights: 10/2/08 ; Spending power: congress can attach strings to the money it spends.
  22. Town of Beloit v. County of Rock: Not discussed in class ; Rational basis for spending is all that is required.
  23. Missouri v. Holland: 10/7/08 ; Congress can make treaties that override subordinate laws
  24. Korematsu v. United States: 10/7/08 ; war power trumps pretty much everything
  25. Cutter v. Wilkinson: 10/8/08 ; the incarcerated persons provision of RLUIPA does not violate the establishment clause
  26. Wisconsin Public Intervenor v. Ralph Mortier: 10/9/08 ; Federal law may pre-empt, but only if it does so explicitly
  27. Atkins v. Virginia: 10/9/08 ; Evolving standards of decency change the way 8A applies to states
  28. Geo-Tech Reclamation Industries Inc. v. Hamrick: 10/14/08 ; Statutes must have a substantial rational relationship to the state's interests, and court can review this
  29. Gibbons v. Ogden: 10/14/08 ; Dormant commerce: no monopolies on who can dock
  30. Kassel v. Consolidated Freightways Corp: 10/15/08 ; states can't regulate truck sizes
  31. Dean Milk Co. v. City of Madison: 10/15/08 ; states can't put an "undue" burden on interstate commerce; dormant commerce trumps safety
  32. Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery: 10/15/08 ; cleverly-enough disguised measures will survive dormant commerce scrutiny
  33. Reeves Inc. v. Stake: 10/16/08 ; a state acting as a market participant may protect itself
  34. White v. Massachusetts Council of Construction Employers: 10/16/08 ; If you're a market participant, your violation of dormant commerce protection can be pretty blatant
  35. Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Montana: 10/16/08 ; severance tax on mineral production isn't discriminatory
  36. Lochner v. New York: 10/22/08 ; Liberty of contract trumps the arbirary rule that bakers can only work so many hours
  37. West Coast Hotel v. Parrish: 10/22/08 ; minimum wage for women is constitutional, despite supposed liberty of contract
  38. Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel: 10/22/08 ; economic legislation that retroactively assigns an unreasonable burden is an unconstitutional taking
  39. Craigmiles v. Giles: 10/28/08 ; protecting a discrete group's economic interests is not a legitimate purpose
  40. U.S. v.Gardner: 10/28/08 ; federal-owned land does not violate the equal footing doctrine
  41. Gregory v. Ashcroft: 10/28/08 ; mandatory retirement age for state judges does not violate equal protection
  42. New York v. United States: 10/29/08 ; congress can't make states take title to radioactive waste
  43. Printz v. United States: 10/29/08 ; Congress can't impress state LEOs into service
  44. Alden v. Maine: 10/29/08 ; States have sovereign immunity against suits from citizens in federal court
  45. Jim C. v. Arkansas: 10/29/08 ; Congress can require states to waive sovereign immunity as a condition of receiving funds. Spending power vs. 11A.
  46. Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council: 10/30/08 ; Federal foreign trade policies trump state policies
  47. Baker v. Carr: 10/30/08 ; Voting apportionments are justiciable
  48. Reynolds v. Simms: mentioned on 11/3/08 ; Racially based gerrymandering is impermissible: population is the controlling criterion for legislative apportionment controversies
  49. Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board: not discussed in class ; lead-up to Bush v. Gore: vacating FL SC re-interpretation of election law after election day
  50. Bush v. Gore: 10/30/08 ; elections demand uniform rules for counting votes
  51. League of Latin American Citizens v. Perry: 11/4/08 ; all districting is political-- it's only a problem when it violates equal protection
  52. Randall v. Sorrell: 11/5/08 ; Expenditure campaign restrictions violate free speech; contribution restrictions can do so as well
  53. U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton: 11/6/08 ; no state-imposed term limits (or perhaps other qualifications) on federal representatives
  54. League of Oregon Cities v. State of Oregon: 11/12/08 ; the need to follow proper election procedure can trump the will of the people (intiative legislation amending the constitution)
  55. Mt. Horeb Community Alert v. Village Board: not discussed in class ; WI criteria for direct legislation
  56. Republican Party of Minnesota v. White: 11/12/08 ; restriction on judicial candidate speech is unconstitutional
  57. Duwe v. Alexander: 11/13/08 ; restrictions on candidates' answering a survey are unconstitutional
  58. Cogswell v. Seattle: 11/13/08 ; a limited forum can restrict speech if it wants
  59. Hutchinson v. Proxmire: 11/13/08 ; limitations on congressional immunity to defamation
  60. Lacy Street Hospitality Service v. Los Angeles: 11/18/08 ; legislatures are required to observe due process
  61. Hinrichs v. Bosma: 11/18/08 ; legislatures are required not to privilege any specific religion
  62. Amalgamated Meat Cutters v. Connally: 11/18/08 ; the limits on what legislative power congress can delegate
  63. Whitman v. American Trucking Associations: 11/18/08 ; no cost-benefit analysis unless congress says so
  64. Bush v. Schiavo: 11/19/08 ; legislature can't delegate a blank check to the governor
  65. Buckley v. Valeo: 11/19/08 ; legislative cronies can't head an executive agency
  66. Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha: 11/19/08 ; no legislative veto
  67. Clinton v. City of New York: barely mentioned on 11/19 ; no presidential line-item veto
  68. Humphreys Executor v. United States: 11/20/08 ; congress has the authority to forbid removal from appointed office except for cause
  69. Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer: 11/20/08 ; President can only do what congress has authorized
  70. United States v. Nixon: 25 November ; executive privilege doesn't trump a valid subpoena
  71. Clinton v. Jones: 11/26/08 ; president can be sued while in office
  72. Environmental Defense Fund v. Thomas: 12/2/08 ; Agencies can't tinker with congressional deadlines
  73. United States and Gorsuch v. House of Representatives: 12/2/08 ; courts should not unnecessarily decide constitutional issues, and congress has contempt power over agencies
  74. Morrison v. Olson: 12/2/08 ; Congress can request the appointment of special prosecutors to investigate executive agencies
  75. FDA v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation: 12/3/08 ; court can enforce limitations on agency jurisdiction
  76. Massachusetts v. EPA: 12/3/08 ; an agency's reason for declining to make a rule must comport with the statute
  77. Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill: 12/3/08 ; agencies are bound by the plain meaning of the law
  78. Chevron USA Inc. v. Natural Resources Defence Council: 12/3/08 ; where a statute is silent or ambiguous on an issue, the courts defer to agency expertise
  79. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp v. Natural Resources Defense Council: 12/3/08 ; courts are technically able to interfere with agency decisionmaking procedures, but that should almost never happen
  80. Federal Open Market Committee v. Merrill: 12/3/08 ; agencies somewhat subject to FOIA
  81. Anderson v. University of Wisconsin: 12/3/08 ; courts defer to agency ajudications of their own issues