Constitutional Law: Cases and Tests

This covers the relevant doctrines, cases, and balancing tests seen throughout the course.

Marbury v. Madison

The constitution of the US is the supreme law of the land. Congress cannot increase federal court jurisdiction. Court may review executive and legislative actions. Constitution is regulatory, not aspirational.

How can congress modify the jurisdiction of federal courts?

Congress can reduce the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, but they cannot entirely remove the jurisdiction of the court due to separation of powers cases.

What are the elements of standing?

Injury in fact, Causation, and Redressability.

What is injury in fact?

Plantiff must have actually suffered an injury, or be imminent to suffer said injury. This cannot be speculative or too attenuated. Lujan v. Defenders of wildlife

What is causation?

There must be a causal link between the alleged injury and the defendant in the case. Allen v. Wright.

What is Redressability?

The court must be able to provide a remedy to fix the alleged harm by the plaintiff.

Ripeness

: Is the dispute developed enough to be adjudicated? For example, a challenge to a law that has not yet been enforced or caused concrete harm may be deemed unripe, as courts avoid ruling on hypothetical or speculative injuries.

Mootness

Has the issue resolved so that court judgment would no longer have an effect? For example, if a student challenges a school’s disciplinary action and graduates before the case is resolved, the issue may be deemed moot unless it fits an exception such as being capable of repetition yet evading review.

Political Question Doctrine and its factors.

the court stays away from certain issues because they are better fit for the others to handle. Factors: 1) text of constitution commits to another branch, 2) lack of judicially manageable standards, 3) potential embarrassment, 4) impossibility of solving without initial policy determination, 5) unusual need for adherence to another branch, 6) impossibility to undertake without disrespecting another branch.

Political question doctrine case

Baker v. Carr (Tennessee district inequality of representation case, facts not very relevant)

Necessary and Proper Clause elements

Congress can legislate using implied powers if the means are:

a. Not prohibited by the constitution; and

b. Rationally related to an enumerated federal objective

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

This clause never is analyzed on its own on an exam, but rather is always in conjunction with another valid congressional power.

What are the limits of the Necessary and proper clause? Magic language for describing it?

Really, there aren’t many. Necessary doesn’t mean absolutely essential, rather just that it need be a rational means to that valid federal objective. The Constitution establishes the legitimate ends, congress has the discretion to determine the means to those ends.

What powers are usually cited in conjunction with the Necessary and Proper clause as justification?

Spending Power, Taxing Power, Enforcing the 13th or the 14th amendment, Commerce Clause.

What three ways can congress regulate using the Commerce Clause?

The channels of interstate commerce, the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, and economic activities which substantially affect interstate commerce.

What are the channels of interstate commerce?

Things like roadways, rivers, railways, and things antecedent to the flow of interstate commerce.

Best case example for regulating the channels of interstate commerce?

Best case is Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States. Blacks were denied the right to stay at hotels, which unduly affected interstate commerce.

What are the instrumentalities of interstate commerce?

Vehicles, boats, goods, or the people involved in interstate commerce.

Case example for instrumentalities of interstate commerce?

Gonzales v. Raich. This was the weed case, where people tried to grow their own for personal use. This case also applies to the third way they can regulate but still.

What are activities that substantially affect interstate commerce?

This is the weakest, but also most broad way they can regulate under the CC.
The activity:

 i.         Must be economic in nature

ii.         Must have a rational basis for believing the activity in aggregate substantially affects interstate commerce

iii.         If the activity is not economic in nature, aggregation is not allowed

iv.         Courts look for a jurisdictional hook, congressional findings, and how direct the relationship between the activity and ISC.

Case Examples for Activities that substantially affect interstate commerce?

To the affirmative, Wickard v. Filburn (the case about growing wheat as a substance farmer affecting commerce if everyone does it), whereas to the negative Lopez (The case about guns being too close to a school) and Morrison (the case about sex based violence) to the negative. Both Lopez and Morrison are great illustrations of the limits of this method of CC legislation, as both were too attenuated to really be justifiable, and had no relation to commerce itself.

Best Cases for the Taxing and Spending Congressional Powers:

Sebelius is probably the best case for both of these powers (the affordable care act case where the court basically went through all of the means in which the act wasn’t and finally was valid as law.

South Dakota v. Dole for the Dole factors test, which outline the time and manner in which congress can use its spending power to influence states.

Congressional 14th Amendment (and 13th) enforcement

Congress can pass laws to enforce the 14th amendment to ensure equal protection and due process under law.

Levels of Presidential authority when not acting under enumerated powers:

As outlined in Youngstown Sheet Co.,
The presidents authority is at its strongest when he acts pursuant to an express or implied congressional authority.

The presidents powers are in twilight when he acts in the absence of a congressional grant of authority. (typically silence or inaction from congress)

The presidents authority is at its lowest ebb when he acts in direct opposition to the express or implied will of congress. In these cases, the president can only rely on powers that are found enumerated within Article II of the constitution, otherwise the act may not be constitutional.

Federalism and the anti-commandeering doctrine (and case):

As established in New York v. United States, the federal government can encourage, but not compel states to adopt federal legislative schemes or objectives, or to enforce federal regulations. This is to Reduce the Risk of Tyranny.

What are the Dole factors?

1: The exercise of the spending power must be in pursuit of “the great welfare”

2: It must be done unambiguously (so that states have a choice)

3: The conditions of the grant must be related to the particular federal interest.

4: Consistent with other constitutional provisions.

5: Must not be unduly coercive.

Executive Privilege (Civil):

Given more deference than in criminal contexts, as criminal trials generally present far greater need for information. NOT a good example, but the best case that we went over for this would be Clinton v. Jones as that at least discussed a sitting presidents amenability to civil suits while in office for acts that occurred before their presidency.

Executive Privilege (Criminal):

United States v. Richard M. Nixon established that executive privilege must yield to a demonstrated special need for essential evidence in a case.

In a criminal case, privilege will prevail if related to acts within presidential authority. (Trump v. U.S.)

Veto Power

Legislation must be approved or Veto’d in full by the president. Line item Vetos are not permissible under the constitution. Clinton v. New York. (Notes case, but worth knowing just in case).

The Appointment Power

“The President shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, Appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States.” Article II § 2.

Appointment Power cases and their relevance:

Congress may neither appoint or remove executive branch officials. Meyers v. U.S.

Congress may restrict the removal of inferior officers appointed by officials OTHER than the president. U.S. v. Perkins

Congress MAY restrict the removal of executive branch officials if they operate within a quasi-judicial or quasi-legislative capacity. Humphrey’s Ex’r v. United States

Executive War Powers and Foreign Policy

Commander in chief of United States Armed Forces. Can make treaties with the advice and consent of 2/3 of the senate.

Preemption

Express preemption- Congress said they literally want to preempt state law.

Implied/Field Preemption- Congressional involvement is so dominant and pervasive that it is reasonable to assume that they meant to leave zero room for states.

Conflict preemption- Complete and irreconcilable conflict between state and federal law. Compliance with both is categorically and literally impossible.

Negative Commerce Clause

State and local laws are unconstitutional if they place undue burden on interstate commerce.

What if a law discriminates on its face or in effect against out of state-ers?

If it discriminates on its face or in practical effect, the burden lies with the state to prove that there is no other or more narrow means to achieve a legitimate state objective. Strict scrutiny, and almost certainly will be overturned.

What if the state law doesn’t discriminate against out of state-ers?

In these cases, the Pike test applies: The law will only be invalidated if the person attacking the law can show that the state has no legitimate interest in the law creating the burden, OR if the states goals can be achieved by a more narrow regulations that place a lesser burden on interstate commerce.

What is the market participant exception?

A state may favor its own citizens in receiving benefits from government programs or in dealing with government-owned business (ONLY if the state is solely a participant in the market, not a regulator).

Privileges and Immunities of Art. IV § 2

Prevents states from discriminating against out of state individuals (does not include businesses or corporations). ONLY operates to protect rights that are deemed fundamental. Camden.

i. Is there discrimination against out-of-staters concerning fundamental rights or important economic activities?

ii. If yes, is there a substantial reason for the difference in treatment, and is the discrimination closely related to that reason?

Equal protection clause of the 14th amendment:

Prevents states from treating similarly situated people differently on the basis of their immutable characteristics (or those generally out of control of the individual).

Major Questions Doctrine:

In cases of significant economic or political impact, courts will not presume Congress intended to delegate decision-making power to administrative agencies without clear and specific statutory authorization. Biden v. Nebraska (The student debt cancellation case).

Levels of scrutiny under the equal protection clause:

Rational basis: Default level of scrutiny. Law must be related to a legitimate (legal, rational) government interest. Challenger bears the burden of proof. (If something isn’t a fundamental right or a truly immutable characteristic, likely belongs here.

Heightened Scrutiny: The law must the substantially related to an important government interest. Usually the test for laws that treat differently due to gender or legitimacy. Burden of proof on the government.

Strict scrutiny: Hardest test to overcome. The law must be necessary for the achievement of a compelling governmental interest. (meaning the only means to an extremely important end). Applies automatically to race, national origin, and fundamental rights.

What about laws for remedy-ing prior discrimination?

Laws like affirmative action MUST be narrowly tailored and time limited. Strict scrutiny the usual test as of 2023 with Students for Fair Admission.

Currently recognized fundamental rights:

Right to marry (Loving v. Virginia, Obergefell v. Hodges)

Right to Procreate (Skinner v. Oklahoma, the criminal sterilization case)

Right to custody of children (Stanley v. Illinois, unwed fathers involved in child’s lives still have right of parentage)

Right of Childrearing (Meyer v. Nebraska, the case about kids not learning languages other than English.)

No longer Fundamental Rights/Never have been Fundamental rights:

Right to an Abortion (Dobbs, overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey). Laws relevant to abortion generally undergo rational basis review now per due process review.

Education: Never been considered a fundamental right; gross disparities in education provided or to who it is afforded to MAY raise equal protection concerns. (San Antonio ISD v. Rodriguez).

What falls under Rational Basis scrutiny?

Alienage (Federal laws/acts concerning it)

Wealth

Disability

Age

Abortion (as of 2023)

What falls under Intermediate Scrutiny?

Gender

Legitimacy (parents and children stuff)

What falls under strict scrutiny?

Race

Alienage (by States)

Ethnicity/National Origin

If a law is facially neutral, what must you prove to prevail under an equal protection analysis?

The challenger to the law must prove discriminatory purpose AND effect. If it prevail the Arlington Heights factors, then the law undergoes strict scrutiny. Otherwise, the law undergoes rational basis review.

What factors are used to determine if a law has a discriminatory intent, even if facially neutral?

Per Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp., the Court looks at the following to determine if there was discriminatory intent behind a facially neutral law:

a)     Impact of the official action;

b)    Historical background of the action;

c)     The specific sequence of events leading to the decision;

d)    Departures from normal procedures and substantive considerations; and

e)     Legislative or administrative history of the action.

What is the analysis + case for analyzing procedural due process?

Per Matthews v. Eldridge:

a)    The private interest will be affected by the official action;

b)    The risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and

c)     The Government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.

How do you know when something is substantive due process vs procedural due process?

If the question is “what”, then it’s likely substantive rights analysis. If it is a question of “how”, then it is likely a question of procedural due process.