B

POLS 341 - Just the cases

1. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

  • Issue: Can Congress create a national bank?

  • Decision: Yes, under the Necessary and Proper Clause.

  • Significance: Strengthened federal power by affirming the use of implied powers.

2. U.S. v. Pink (1942)

  • Issue: Can executive agreements preempt state law?

  • Decision: Yes, they can.

  • Significance: Reaffirmed the federal executive’s authority in foreign relations.

3. Rucho v. Common Cause (2019)

  • Issue: Is partisan gerrymandering justiciable?

  • Decision: No, it is a nonjusticiable political question.

  • Significance: The Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering is outside the scope of judicial intervention.

4. Marbury v. Madison (1803)

  • Issue: Does the Supreme Court have the power to declare laws unconstitutional?

  • Decision: Yes, it established judicial review.

  • Significance: Empowered the judiciary by affirming the principle of judicial review.

5. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. U.S. (1935)

  • Issue: Can Congress delegate legislative power to the executive?

  • Decision: No, the delegation was unconstitutional.

  • Significance: Reinforced the non-delegation doctrine and limited executive power.

6. Luther v. Borden (1849)

  • Issue: Can the Court adjudicate disputes about the republican form of government in states?

  • Decision: No, it was a political question.

  • Significance: Established the political question doctrine, which limits judicial power in certain areas.

7. Walter Nixon v. United States (1993)

  • Issue: Can the Court review the Senate’s impeachment procedure?

  • Decision: No, it is a political question.

  • Significance: Reinforced the idea that impeachment procedures are outside judicial review.

8. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992)

  • Issue: Does the plaintiff have standing to challenge a federal statute based on environmental harm?

  • Decision: No, the plaintiff lacked standing.

  • Significance: Established the "injury-in-fact" requirement for standing.

9. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)

  • Issue: Can the president seize private property during wartime without Congressional approval?

  • Decision: No, the seizure was unconstitutional.

  • Significance: Limited presidential power, particularly in national emergencies.

10. INS v. Chadha (1983)

  • Issue: Can Congress use a legislative veto to block executive actions?

  • Decision: No, it was unconstitutional.

  • Significance: Limited Congress’ power to veto executive actions.

11. Missouri v. Holland (1920)

  • Issue: Can the federal government override state sovereignty with a treaty?

  • Decision: Yes, federal treaty-making power supersedes state sovereignty.

  • Significance: Affirmed the federal government’s broad power in foreign relations.

12. Reynolds v. Sims (1964)

  • Issue: Does legislative apportionment violate the principle of "one person, one vote"?

  • Decision: Yes, districts must be roughly equal in population.

  • Significance: Reinforced the Equal Protection Clause by ensuring fair representation in state legislatures.

13. U.S. v. Curtis Wright (1936)

  • Issue: Does the president have exclusive power to conduct foreign affairs?

  • Decision: Yes, the president is the "sole organ" of foreign policy.

  • Significance: Strengthened the president’s role in foreign relations.

14. NYC v. Clinton (2000)

  • Issue: Can the president use line-item vetoes to cancel portions of congressional legislation?

  • Decision: No, the line-item veto was unconstitutional.

  • Significance: Limited the president’s power to amend laws passed by Congress.

15. Zivotofsky v. Kerry (2015)

  • Issue: Does the president have exclusive authority to recognize foreign governments?

  • Decision: Yes, the president has the sole power to recognize foreign governments.

  • Significance: Reinforced presidential authority in foreign relations.

16. U.S. v. Nixon (1974)

  • Issue: Can the president invoke executive privilege to withhold evidence in a criminal investigation?

  • Decision: No, the president’s privilege was outweighed by the need for evidence.

  • Significance: Limited executive privilege, ensuring accountability in criminal investigations.

17. Clinton v. Jones (1997)

  • Issue: Does the president have immunity from civil lawsuits for actions taken before office?

  • Decision: No, the president does not have immunity.

  • Significance: Limited presidential immunity, allowing civil lawsuits against the president.

18. U.S. v. Carolene Products (1938)

  • Issue: Can Congress regulate interstate commerce for public health concerns?

  • Decision: Yes, under the Commerce Clause.

  • Significance: Established the "Footnote Four" standard for heightened scrutiny of laws affecting minorities or constitutional rights.