Court Cases

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Letters of commission- paperwork allowing an appointee to take office

Writ of Mandamus- a command issued from a superior court to a lower court or public official

Original jurisdiction article III

The Judiciary Act of 1789- allowed the supreme court to issue the writ of mandamus

William Marbury was appointed Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia by President John Adams because he, along with 16 other appointees, did not receive their letters of commission and could therefore not take office.
After John Adams left office, Thomas Jefferson took office and told James Madison (the new secretary of state) to not deliver some of the letters, Marbury sued Madison and asked the supreme court to issue a writ of mandamus that would force Madison to deliver the commissions.

Does Marburt have a right to his commission, and can he sue the federal government for it?

Does the Supreme Court have the authority to order the delivery of the commission?

In favor of Marbury, they said that the Judiciary Act of 1789 conflicted with Article III of the constitution so they did not have the authority to issue the writ of mandamus. This established Judicial Review as a court struck down a law that conflicted with the constitution.

Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission (2010)

1st Amendment (freedom of Speech & Expression)

McCain-Feingold (BCRA - Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act) 2002 - Limited soft money contributions by corporations and labor unions

Citizens United (non-profit) Hilary the Movie - Critical of Clinton

FEC saw this as a soft money violation of McCain-Feingold

Does a law that limits the ability of corporations and labor unions to spend their own money to advocate the election or defeat of a candidate violate the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech?

YES! McCain-Feingold is ruled unconstitutional

Limiting soft money donations is a violation of the 1st Amendment and free speech. Money is a form of speech.

Impact: Paves the way for SuperPacs to have unlimited independent expenditures. (Cannot give hard money contributions, can’t coordinate with candidate)

United States v. Lopez (1995)

commerce clause article 1, federalism- the division of power between the federal and state governments

First time in history the supreme court hd limited congresses powers in the commerce clause
Lopex is charged of gun possession on school property under federal law
Lopez appeals to the supreme court, arguing that the federal government has exceeded its power stated in the commerce clause as schools were regulated by their state not the federal government.

Does congress have the power to regulate commerce such as carrying firearms on school grounds?

No, 5-4 favor for Lopez congress does not have the power to punish for federal crimes as gun control does not have any economic effect on interstate commerce.

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Establishment clause of the first amendment
First amendment

In New York state, they required a prayer to be read to the students in a public school
Jewish parents got upset because they felt the school was establishing a religion on the students

Does the school sponsored non denominational prayer in public school violate the establishment clause of the first amendment?

The supreme court agreed with the Engel family in a 6-1 vote. Majority of them stated that by providing students to absent themselves from this prayer did not make this law constitutional therefore this law violates the Establishment Clause of the first amendment.

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

First amendment

Free exercise clause: the constitution protects your ability to practice any religion you want, however you want

Amish families challenged the Wisconsin laws under the first amendment
The families argued that Wisconsin law did not align with their religious beliefs, which in this case forbid parents to send their children to school after 8th grade because it endangers their distinct way of life

Did Wisconsin's argument→that all parents send their children to school at least until the age of 16→ violate the first amendment by criminalizing the conduct of parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons?

The Supreme Court agreed with the Amish families, concluding that the free exercise rights of the Amish families outweighed the states compelling interest.

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)

1st amendment

A group of students wanted to protest against the vietnam war and decided to wear armbands
The kids were suspended because of wearing armbands and protesting
The kids and their parents sued the school and the case was brought to the Supreme Court

Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students freedom of speech and protection guaranteed by the First Amendment?

Material and Substantial Disruption - an act of intentionally disrupting class or the school (not protecting speech).

The supreme court ruled in favor of Tinker in a 7-2 decision. The armbands did not violate the material and substantial disruption.

New York Times v. United States (1971)

First amendment: freedom for the press

“Pentagon papers”- papers released by Daniel Eilsberg

During the vietnam war, the United States was lying to its citizens about the war
Daniel Elisberg a former military analyst, released the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times
New York Times wrote the newspaper articles about the Pentagon Papers and the government sued under the Espionage act to make them stop publishing more articles

Did the government's efforts to prevent two newspapers from publishing classified information given to them by a government leaker violate the First Amendment, protection of freedom of the press?

Prior Restraint - government suppressing speech or expression before it actually happens, like preventing a newspaper from publishing

6-3 decision, government cannot prevent the newspapers from publishing the information because of the 1st amendment. They said the press must be left free to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions, or prior restraints. Prior restraint is NOT allowed.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Selective Incorporation & 14th Due Process

6th amendment- right to a lawyer

In 1963, Clarence Earl Gideon (poor man) was charged breaking and entering in Florida
When taken into custody, he requested attorney but we denied because Florida law only provide counsel for capital offenses
He was found guilty and sentenced to 5 year

Does the sixth amendment right to counsel in criminal cases extend to defendants in state courts, even in cases in which the death penalty is not at issue.

The court ruled that the 6th amendment applies to state criminal trials which means states must provide legal representation to anyone who can't afford a lawyer
This case had a huge impact because it ensured everyone, regardless of their financial status, has the right legal presentation

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

Selective Incorporation & 14th Due Process

2nd amendment

14th amendment

Chris McDonald felt unsafe in his neighborhood due to an increase in crime and wanted to won handguns for self defense
In 1982, Chicago banned the registration of handguns making it illegal for citizens living in Chicago to own a handgun
McDonald challenged Chicago’s handgun ban, arguing it violated their Second Amendment rights.

Does theSecond Amendment right to keep and bear arms apply to state and local governments through the 14th amendment and thus limit Chicago's ability?

5-4 decision, in favor of McDonald, stating that the second amendment right to bear arms is applicable to to states

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

14th Equal Protection

Linda Brown wanted to go to an integrated school

She was not allowed to do this as a result of Plessy v. Ferguson “Separate but equal doctrine”

Does segregation of public schools by race violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment?

In 9-0 Decision it was was ruled that public schools must integrate racially

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

Necessary and proper clause (elastic Clause) Article 1: congress can pass laws that help them to carry out their enumerated powers

(example tax). The created powers are implied (creating a bank)

Supremacy clause (article 6)

Congress chartered the second national bank in Maryland
Maryland then imposed taxes on that bank
McCulloch (federal cashier) refused to pay the taxes and was sued by Maryland

Does the Constitution give congress power to create a national bank?

Can individual states ban or tax the bank?

9-0 in favor of McCulloch

Yes, constitution does give congress power to create a national bank

No, individual states cant ban or tax the federal bank