Poli 450 SCOTUS Case and Holding

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 0 people
0.0(0)
full-widthCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/23

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced

No study sessions yet.

24 Terms

1
New cards

Bowsher v. Synar (1986)

o Graham-Rudman-Hollings Act is unconstitutional because the comptroller general is a legislative officer that cannot possess Executive authority

o Comptroller general is a legislative officer who cannot have executive authority

2
New cards

Morrison v. Olson (1988)

Independent Counsel Act is constitutional because inferior officers do not need to follow the Appointment Clause

3
New cards

Myers v. United States (1926)

Removal of Myers by President is valid. Statute granting removal authority to Congress is constitutional

4
New cards

Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935)

Humphrey’s removal by FDR is invalid. FTC act providing for specific removal provisions is constitutional

5
New cards

Clinton v. City of New York (1998)

The Presidential Line Item Veto Act is unconstitutional because it violets the Presentiment Clause of the Constitution

6
New cards

United States v. Nixon (1974)

Subpoena is valid because the President does not enjoy Executive Privilege to withhold evidence from a criminal investigation

7
New cards

Clinton v. Jones (1997)

Jones’ lawsuit is valid and may proceed because the President does not possess immunity over unofficial conduct not related to national security

8
New cards

Trump v. United States (2024)

Part of the indictment is dismissed because presidents enjoy absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official actions

9
New cards

Martin v Hunter’s Lessee (1816)

Appellate jurisdiction of the SCOTUS extends to the review of state court decisions that interpret federal law

10
New cards

Cohens v. Virginia (1821)

 Conviction is upheld because state law banning lottery tickets is valid

 Court gains appellate jurisdiction and judicial review authority over state law

11
New cards

Eakin v. Raub (1825)

Gibson’s Dissent: Framers of the Constitution made clear that federal government works through cooperation of branches, Oath to support the Constitution taken by all government officials, and  Supremacy Clause of the Constitution is in Article 6

12
New cards

Ex parte McCardle (1869)

o McCardle’s petition for Habeas Corpus is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction

o The SCOTUS appellate jurisdiction is governed by Congress

13
New cards

Ashwander v. TVA (1936)

Brandeis argued that the Court should not have addressed the constitutional questions involved in the case, because Ashwander had not suffered an injury sufficient to bring the suit.

14
New cards

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

 Marbury’s claim for a writ of mandamus is denied because the Supreme Court does not possess original jurisdiction

15
New cards

Powell v. McCormack (1969)

 Powell can obtain his seat because Congress does not have authority to exclude members who meet Constitutional requirements for office

16
New cards

US Term Limits v. Thornton (1995)

Thornton is allowed to run for reelection because states do not have the authority to change qualifications for congressional office

17
New cards

Gravel v. United States (1972)

Grand jury subpoena is quashed because Speech and Debate Clause extends to congressional aides

18
New cards

Watkins v. United States (1957)

Conviction for contempt of Congress is overturned because Congress did not provide information connecting relevance of investigation to legitimate legislative duty

19
New cards

Barenblatt v. United States (1959)

Barenblatt’s contempt of Congress conviction is upheld because Committee provided proper information about the link between investigation and legislative activity

20
New cards

Trump v. Mazars (2020)

Congressional subpoena request is denied and cases sent back to District Court for new trial

21
New cards

Gibbons v. Ogden

The federal permit supersedes state law because Congress possesses authority over interstate commerce and navigation is considered commerce

22
New cards

U.S. v. E.C. Knight Co

Federal action to prevent monopoly is invalid because manufacturing is not part of interstate commerce

23
New cards

Stafford v. Wallace

Congressional statute regulating the meatpacking industry is constitutional because stockyards are part of the stream of commerce

24
New cards

Schechter Poultry Corp v. United States

National Industrial Recovery Act is declared unconstitutional because Congress cannot delegate lawmaking authority to the Executive. Workplace and labor regulations are local/intrastate, not interstate.