LSJ 360 Midterm 1

Court Cases and Other Terminology

Calder v Bull (1789)

the stuff of the will was given to calder but wanted to give it to Bull

state issued legislative bull

Marshall Court

Legal question: Is the Connecticut legislative resolution setting aside a probate decree and granting a new hearing on a will a violation of the ex post facto clause

The decision: Unanimously decided that ex post facto was limited to criminal cases

Justice Chase delivering opinon of court

• an act of legislature contrary to the principles of the constitution should not be considered proper excersice of legislative authority

Key Concepts

• Ex Post Facto Clause — after the fact

  • if an action was legal when you did it, you cannot get arrested later because of a later law barring it

• Natural Law/Structural Justifications of Judicial Review

Marbury v Madison (1803)

symbolically confirm the concept of judicial review

Key legal questions

1. Does marbury have right to the commission?

2. Does the law grant Marbury a remedy?

3. Does the Supreme Court have the authority to review acts of Congress and determine whether they are unconconstitutional and therefore void [the power of “judicial review”]?

4. Can Congress expand the scope of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction beyond what is specified in Article III of the Constitution

5. Does the Supreme Court have original juridiction to issues writs of mamdamus?

Chief Justice Marshall: it was fair for Marshall to bring up commission under the Judiciary Act of 1789, as Jefferson was acting unlawfully under that act. However, the act itself was unconsitutional. It is therefore in the hands of the judicial branch, specifically the supreme court, to ensure that the Constitution remains the supreme text of the land that legislatures follow. In cases where the constitution is mentioned, Supreme Court intervenes. if two laws conflict, the Supreme Court interveness

Chisolm v Georgia (1793)

Legal question: can the stte of georgia be sued over war associated debts it owed to a citizen of South Carolina?

Martin v Hunter’s Lesee (1816)

Legal question: Does judicial review apply to the states and state courts?

Justice Story on opinion: appelate power of the US does extend to cases pending in the state courts.

McCulloch v Maryland (1819)

Legal Question: Is the national bank constitutional? If so, based on what provision of the Constitution?

John Marshall’s constitutional statement

Marshall on opinion (unanimous): even though power of bank is not explicitly written in article 1 of the constitution, necessary and proper clause allows it as a means to carry out explicit powers like collecting taxes, borrowing money, and regulating commerce (implied powers). maryland could not tax the bank because under supremacy clause, federal laws outweight state laws

Marshall

Important legal terms

• necessary and proper clause

• implied powers

• strict vs elastic constructionism

• supremacy clause

Gibbons v Ogden (1824)

What is the scope of commerce clause?

Was New York’s steamboat monopoly, as applied to a vessel with federal liscence?

Can states pass laws affecting interstate commerce?

Marshall on decision (unanimous): Under the Supremacy Clause, valid federal laws override conflicting state laws. Commerce involves not just buying and selling, but rather navigation and “interc0urse.” When these happen between states, it therefore become a federal issue, so the federal permit overrides the state one

Key terms

• commerce clause

• supremacy clause

Worcester v Georgia (1832)

Can Georgia pass laws the contradict treaties signed with indigenous tribes?

Marshall on decision: Indian tribes are distinct, independent political communtities. US Constitution gives the federal gov exclusive authority of Native American affairs

terms

• tribal sovereignty

President Jackson refused to enforce the decision

Barron v Baltimore (1833)

Does the takings clause of the 5th Amendment — or any part of the Bill of Rights — apply to state governments, or only to the national government?

Bill of Rights as a compromise needed for ratification

John Marshall on Opinion (unanimous): Bill of Rights only applies to federal government, state constitutions protect citizens from state level actions

Terms

• takings clause — government can’t take property away from you without a warrant

Luther v Borden (1849)

What does the guarentee clause entail?

Can the Supreme Court apply the clause?

Taney (5-1) — deciding which state gov was non-justiciable political question. Power to recognize a state’s lawfull government belong to Congress and the President

terms

• guarentee clause — people are guarenteed a republican form of government

Cooley v Board of Wardens (1852)

Can states require ships entering or leaving Philadelphia to hire local pilots, or does this violate the dormant commerce clause?

Taney on decision — subjects of commerce that are national require Congressional regulation. subjects of commerce that are local (like pilotaage) are up to the state, as long it doesnt contradict federal regulation

terms

• cooley doctrine — selective exclusivity

Dred Scott v Sandford (1857)

Can Congress ban slavery in the territories?

Are free African-Americans citizens of the United States who can sue in the federal court?

Does the Article IV power to make needful regulations for the territories apply to all territories or only to old territories and/or land transfers?

Is there a 5th Amendment due process right to bring property into the territories?

Taney on decision (5-2) ruling: it doesn’t matter if an enslaved person is in a free or slave state, black people are not citizens and therefore have no access to sue in federal courts

Roosevelt v Meyer (1863)

strategic attitudinal

Ex Parte McCardle (1869)

go back and get a sumarizer for graber article