- •Constitutional Law – Spring 1999
- •Federalism - Vertical distribution of government power a government of enumerated powers - Why does federalism matter?
- •Implied powers - McCulloch V. Maryland – Bank of the u.S.
- •“Substantially affecting” commerce
- •Pre New Deal Gibbons V. Ogden – New York steamboat monopoly
- •United States V. E.C. Knight - Manufacture vs. Commerce – Sugar monopoly
- •Substantial economic effects and stream of commerce
- •The Shreveport Rate Cases – Substantial economic effects – Railroad rates
- •Police power
- •Champion V. Ames - The Lottery Case
- •Hammer V. Dagenhart - Child labor
- •Stafford V. Wallace - Stream of commerce
- •Summary of pre-New Deal law on commerce clause
- •The New Deal Crisis and the Rise of the Welfare State
- •Schechter Poultry Corp. V. United States
- •Carter V. Carter Coal Co.
- •Modern Trend
- •Nlrb V. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. - Expanded “substantial economic effect”
- •Wickard V. Filburn - The “cumulative effect” theory
- •United States V. Darby - police power regulations - Minimum wage
- •Civil rights cases and the commerce clause Heart of Atlanta Motel V. United States – Local incident of interstate commerce
- •Katzenbach V. McClung – Ollie’s bbq
- •Effect of Lopez
- •Judicial abdication during New Deal
- •United States V. Lopez – Latest word – Guns and schools do mix
- •Reconciling Lopez with New Deal
- •Current status of commerce clause
- •Does Lopez provide workable rule of law?
- •Spending power United States V. Butler - Beyond enumerated powers
- •Steward Machine Co. V. Davis
- •South Dakota V. Dole - National drinking age
- •Pennhurst State School & Hospital V. Halderman
- •Dormant commerce clause (dcc) – Protection against facial discrimination
- •Gibbons V. Ogden – New York steamboat monopoly
- •Willson V. Black Bird Creek Marsh Co.
- •Cooley V. Board of Port Wardens (1851) – “Cooley test” – That which is by nature national
- •Modern dcc doctrine
- •City of Philadelphia V. New Jersey – dcc – No solid waste
- •West Lynn Creamery, Inc. V. Healy – Milk tax subsidizes in-state farmers
- •Bobbitt’s modalities and the dcc?
- •Garcia V. San Antonio mta - Overruled National League of Cities – Minimum wage
- •Use of state’s lawmaking mechanisms
- •New York V. United States - Waste disposal
- •Printz V. United States – Brady Bill – Don’t No commandeer state executive
- •Possible McCulloch theory underlying New York and Printz
- •U.S. Term Limits V. Thornton
- •Other Federalism premises The treaty and war powers Missouri V. Holland – Migratory birds
- •Woods V. Cloyd w. Miller Co.
- •The taxing power Bailey V. Drexel Furniture Co.
- •The guarantee clause and the reconstruction amendments
- •Texas V. White
- •Validity of 13th and 14th Amendments
- •The power to enforce the reconstruction amendments
- •Katzenbach V. Morgan – Spanish speaking voters
- •City of Boerne V. Flores – rfra Unconstitutional
- •Limitations on state regulation
- •Typology of Powers
- •Preemption
- •The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV
- •United Building Council V. Camden - No market participant exception for pic
- •Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. V. Ward
- •Facially neutral statutes with significant effects on interstate commerce
- •Exxon Corp. V. Governor of Maryland
- •Hunt V. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm’n
- •Separation of powers - Horizontal distribution of national power Distribution of national power - Why does separation of powers matter?
- •Formalism vs. Functionalism
- •Judicial review Marbury V. Madison – Supreme Court review of congressional statutes
- •Theoretical foundation of judicial review
- •Martin V. Hunter’s Lessee – Supreme Court review of state court decisions
- •Judicial exclusivity Cooper V. Aaron - Federal judiciary is supreme – sCt binds states
- •Does judicial review imply judicial supremacy?
- •Departmentalism
- •Jurisdiction and standing
- •Ex Parte McCardle - Congressional control of appellate jurisdiction
- •United States V. Klein
- •Good confusion
- •Case or Controversy Requirement
- •Standing
- •Allen V. Wright - irs tax-exempt status for segregated private school
- •Lujan V. Defenders of the Wildlife – Endangered Species Act
- •Raines V. Byrd - Line item veto
- •Perspective on cases
- •Political question doctrine
- •Baker V. Carr - Apportionment of the Tennessee Assembly
- •Luther V. Borden - Guaranty clause non-justiciable
- •Why is there a political question doctrine?
- •Davis V. Bandemer - Unconstitutional gerrymandering justiciable
- •Nixon V. United States - Impeachment non-justiciable
- •Coleman V. Miller - Congress gets to say whether usc has been amended
- •Dames & Moore V. Regan - Iran hostage settlement
- •Executive privilege United States V. Nixon – Watergate tapes
- •Reviewability of executive privilege decisions
- •Scope of executive privilege
- •Presidential immunity
- •Mississippi V. Johnson
- •Nixon V. Fitzgerald
- •Harlow V. Fitzgerald
- •Clinton V. Jones
- •Law versus politics
- •Nixon V. Administrator of General Services
- •Law as politics
- •Impeachment
- •Law and politics
- •Bicameralism and presentment
- •Ins V. Chadha - One house veto provision stricken
- •General critique by Koppelman
- •Single-house actions approved by usc
- •Chadha in context - Legislative control of the bureaucracy
- •Future directions
- •Administrative agencies and the separation of powers
- •Meyers V. United States
- •The rise of independent agencies
- •Humphrey’s Executor V. United States - ftc member removal
- •Wiener V. United States - War Claims Commission removal
- •Buckley V. Valeo - Appointments Clause and fec – Officer of the u.S.
- •Various assessments of Myers, Humphrey’s Executor, and Buckley.
- •Bowsher V. Synar - Good-bye Gramm-Rudman
- •Commitment and the budget
- •Appointments power - Congressional control over administrative officials Chadha and Bowsher
- •Morrison and Bowsher
- •Koppelman on Morrison and Mistretta
- •Freytag V. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
- •Weiss V. United States
- •Edmond V. United States
- •Justice Scalia’s Bowsher and Mistretta dissents
- •Congressional control of administrative agencies after Chadha and Bowsher
- •Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority
- •Non delegation doctrine and “quasi-constitutional” statutes
- •Introduction
- •Panama Refining Co. V. Ryan
- •Schechter Poultry Corp. V. United States
- •Demise of non-delegation doctrine
- •Amalgamated Meat Cutters V. Connally
- •Touby V. United States
- •Loving V. United States
- •Arguments in favor of reviving non-delegation doctrine d. Schoenbrod
- •Industrial Union V. American Petroleum Institute – Rehnquist dissent
- •Ely (Democracy and Distrust)
- •Stewart – against non delegation doctrine
- •Lowi’s assessment of the “new” Constitution
- •Structural statutes
- •Executive authority – foreign Control of foreign affairs
- •United States V. Curtiss-Wright Corp. – Foreign arms sales embargo
- •Text, history, and presidential power
- •Functionalism and the autonomy of constitutional interpretation
- •Allocation of war making authority
- •Approaches toward reconciling these provisions
- •Prize Cases - President’s power to use armed forces
- •Orlando V. Laird – Vietnam non-justiciable
- •Dellums V. Bush – The Persian Gulf War
- •Un “peacekeeping” or “peace enforcement”
- •Legislative authority - foreign The War Powers Resolution
- •War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional
- •The War Powers Resolution is constitutional
- •Practice under the Resolution
- •The Constitution without courts – War Powers and Boland
- •Other separation of powers premises Treaties
- •Executive Agreements
- •Dames & Moore V. Regan - Constitutional limits on scope of executive agreements
- •United States V. Belmont
- •Congressional-executive agreements
- •Impoundment
- •Line item vetoes
- •Unfunded mandates
- •New York V. United States – No unfunded mandates – 10th Amendment
- •Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995.
- •Contract with America
- •Constitutional amendment to balance the budget
- •Morrison V. Olson – Special prosecutor laws
- •Mistretta V. United States – u.S. Sentencing Commission
- •Final thoughts on separation of powers
- •Individual rights Overview
- •Equal protection Utility of equal protection analysis
- •Race and the Constitution
- •Slavery and the Constitution
- •State V. Post
- •Dred Scott V. Sanford
- •Reconstruction and retreat Strauder V. West Virginia – Invalidated law barring blacks from juries
- •Plessy V. Ferguson – Separate but equal – Railroad cars
- •Equal protection methodology - strict scrutiny Korematsu V. United States (Black 1944) – Japanese wwii interment
- •Overview of equal protection doctrine
- •The attack on Jim Crow Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka (Brown I) – School desegregation
- •Bolling V. Sharpe - 14th Amendment equal protection federal via 5th Amendment
- •Brown II
- •Facially neutral laws that disadvantage minorities Washington V. Davis
- •Privileges or immunities – 14th Amendment
- •The Slaughter-House Cases – New Orleans slaughtering monopoly
- •Slaugheter-House remains good law
- •Incorporation
- •Barron V. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore
- •Murray V. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co.
- •Twining V. New Jersey
- •Palko V. Connecticut – Double jeopardy
- •Adamson V. California – Black dissent - Total incorporation
- •Duncan V. Louisiana
- •Contracts clause - Protecting economic liberties - Textual Fletcher V. Peck – Corrupt land sale contract not voidable by State
- •Ogden V. Saunders – State bankruptcy law valid prospectively
- •Calder V. Bull – Ex post facto - Historical Modality – Criminal only
- •Home Building and Loan Assn. V. Blaisdell
- •Modern contracts clause law and ak analysis
- •Substantive due process - Protecting economic interests - “Redistribution”
- •Lochner V. New York – Time to make the donuts – No maximum hours for bakers
- •Ak’s lecture on Lochner
- •Civil War makes Lochner look less crazy
- •Structural and ethical basis for Lochner holding
- •Dissent - Harlan
- •Dissent - Holmes
- •Forming an opinion of Lochner
- •Lochner Era - most significant judicial interventions in American history
- •Munn V. Illinois - Escape hatch from Lochner – “Public interest”
- •Muller V. Oregon – Another escape hatch – Women “special class”
- •Bailey V. Alabama – Personal service contracts enforced by jail time no more
- •Nebbia V. New York
- •West Coast Hotel Co. V. Parrish – The death of Lochner – Female minimum wage
- •United States V. Carolene Products Co. – Filled milk
- •Williamson V. Lee Optical - Full employment for ophthalmologists
- •Ferguson V. Skrupa
- •Summary of substantive due process - Economic rights
- •Privacy, personhood, and family - Modern Substantive due process West Virginia State Board of Education V. Barnette - Overview
- •The right of privacy
- •Individual rights after the New Deal
- •Meyer V. Nebraska – Okay to teach foreign language to school children
- •Pierce V. Society of Sisters
- •Griswold V. Connecticut - Condommania
- •Eisenstadt V. Baird
- •Abortion
- •Roe V. Wade
- •Roe and Griswold
- •Planned Parenthood V. Casey – Abortion waiting period and other restrictions
- •Ak’s approach to abortion question
- •Bowers V. Hardwick - Sodomy
- •Washington V. Glucksberg - Physician-assisted suicide
- •Sex and sexual orientation Reed V. Reed
- •Frontiero V. Richardson – Classification based on sex inherently suspect
- •Craig V. Boren – Beer sales to 18 – 20 year-old women only, not men
- •United States V. Virginia – vmi gender integration
- •Other Candidates for heightened scrutiny Romer V. Evans – Special rights for gays
- •Brown V. Board of Education (1954): 14th Amendment, Equal Protection
- •Bolling V. Sharpe (1954): 5th Amendment, Equal Protection, Due Process
- •Marbury V. Madison (1803): Judicial Review, Interpret Constitution
- •Cooper V. Aaron (1958): Judicial Review, Interpret Constitution
- •Swann V. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. Ed. (1971): 14th Amendment, Segregation
- •Freeman V. Pitts (1992): 14th Amendment, School Desegregation
- •Martin V. Hunter’s Lessee (1816): Supremacy Clause, Judicial Review
- •McCulloch V. Maryland (1819): Implied Power, 10th Amendment
- •Us Term Limits V. Thornton (1995): 10th Amendment, Term Limits
- •Gibbons V. Ogden (1824): Commerce Clause, Federal V. States
- •Us V. E.C. Knight (1895): Commerce, Anti-Trust
- •Champion V. Ames [lottery case] (1903): Commerce
- •Swift & Co. V. Us (1905): Commerce, “Current of Commerce”
- •The Shreveport Rate Case (1914): Commerce, “close and substantial relation”
- •Hammer V. Dagenhart (1918): Commerce, 10th Amendment
- •Nlrb V. Jones & Laughlin (1937) Commerce Clause, New Deal legislation
- •Us V. Darby (1941): Commerce Clause, Child Labor, Manufacturing
- •Heart of Atlanta Motel (1964): Commerce Clause, Civil Rights Act 1964
- •Katzenbach V. McClung (1964): Commerce Clause, Civil Rights Act 1964
- •Us V. Lopez (1995): Commerce Clause, Guns in school zone
- •South Dakota V. Dole (1987): Commerce Clause, 21st Amendment
- •Missouri V. Holland (1920): 10th Amendment
- •Katzenbach V. Morgan (s.Car.) (1966): 14th a., Due Process, Literacy to Vote
- •Boerne City V. Flores (1997): 1st a. Free exercise V. 14th a. Legislative authority
- •Jones V. Mayer Co. (1968): 13th Amendment, Equal Housing
- •Garcia V. San Antonio Metro Transit Auth. (1985) 10th a., Federalism
- •New York V. United States (1992): 10th Amendment, Supremacy Clause
- •Printz V. United States (1997): 10th a., Commerce Clause, Original Intent
- •Cooley V. Board of Wardens (1852): Federalism, Concurrent Powers
- •City of Philadelphia V. New Jersey (1978): Dormant Commerce Clause
- •Kassel V. Consolidated Freightways Corp. (1981): Safety V. Commerce
- •West Lynn Creamery, Inc. V. Healy (1994): Interstate Commerce
- •Corfield V. Coryell (1823): Privilege and Immunity Clause
- •United Bldg. V. Camden (1984) Privilege & Immunity V. Commerce Clause
- •Youngstown Co. V. Sawyer (1952): Separation of Powers, Emergency power
- •Us V. Curtiss-Wright Corp. (1936) Separation of Power, External V. Internal
- •Dames & Moore V. Regan (1981): Implicit powers
- •Korematsu V. United States (1944): Emergency Executive Order
- •United States V. Nixon (1974): Executive Privilege
- •Clinton V. Jones (1997): Separation of Powers, Presidential Immunity
- •Mistretta V. United States (1989) “Non delegation” of Congressional Power
- •Ins V. Chadha (1983): Legislative Veto
- •Clinton V. City of New York (1998): Separation of Powers, Line Item Veto
- •Bowsher V. Synar: (1986): Separation of Powers
- •Morrison V. Olson (1988): Separation of Powers, Independent Counsel
- •Northern Pipeline Co. V. Marathon (1982): Separation of powers, delegation
- •Commodity Futures t.C. V. Schor (1986): Separation of Power, delegation
- •Ex Parte McCardle (1869) Separation of Powers, Exceptions clause
- •Baker V. Carr (1962): Limits on Judicial Power, Political Questions
- •Nixon V. United States (1993): Limits, Political Question
- •Raines V. Byrd (1997): Limits, Standing
- •Allen V. Wright (1984): Limits, Standing
- •Lujan V. Defenders of Wildlife (1975): Limits, Standing
- •Missouri V. Jenkins (II) (1990): Limit, Scope of remedy
- •Missouri V Jenkins (III) (1995): Limits Jurisdiction
- •Fletcher V. Peck (1810): Economic Liberties, Property Rights
- •Ogden V. Saunders (1827): Economic Liberties, Contracts Clause
- •Calder V. Bull: (1798): Economic Liberties, Ex post facto
- •The Slaughter House Cases (1873): Economic Liberties, 13th, 14th a, Monopolies
- •Palko V. Connecticut (1937): Double Jeopardy, Due Process (14th a.)
- •Adamson V. California (1947): 5th a. Not part of Due Process (14th a.)
- •Skinner V. Oklahoma (1942): Due Process, Sterilization
- •Lochner V. New York (1905): Substantive Due Process, Freedom to Contract
- •Bailey V. Alabama (1910): 13th a., Race Discrimination
- •West Coast Hotel V. Parrish (1937): 5th, 14th a., Freedom to Contract
- •Williamson V. Lee Optical (1955): 14th a., Due Process, Judicial Power
- •Meyer V. Nebraska (1923): 14th a., Due Process, Privacy
- •Poe V. Ullman (1961): 14th a., Due Process, Individual Rights, “Ripeness”
- •Griswold V. Connecticut (1965): 14th, 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th a., Privacy
- •Roe V. Wade (1973): Privacy, Abortion (9th, 14th a.)
- •Planned Parenthood V. Casey (1992): Privacy, Abortion
- •Bowers V. Hardwick (1986): Fundamental Rights, Sodomy, 8th a.
- •Washington V. Glucksberg (1997): Privacy, Right to Die, 14th a.
- •Railway Express Agency V. New York (1949): 14th a., Rational Basis review
- •Fcc V. Beach Communications (1993): 5th, 14th a, Rational Basis Review
- •Bradwell V. Illinois (1873): 14th a., Gender Discrimination
- •Frontiero V. Richardson (1973): 5th a., Gender Discrimination
- •Craig V. Boren (1976): 14th a., Gender Discrimination
- •U.S. V. Virginia (1996): 14th a., Gender Discrimination
- •Watkins V. U.S. Army (1989): 14th a, Gay Discrimination, Status V. Conduct
- •Romer V. Evans (1996): 14th a., Gay Discrimination, political participation
- •Baehr V. Lewin (1993): Gay Marriage, Equal Rights
Romer V. Evans (1996): 14th a., Gay Discrimination, political participation
Colorado voters adopted A. 2 to their State Constitution precluding any judicial, legislative, or executive action designed to protect persons from discrimination based on their "homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships." Does A. 2 of Colorado's State Constitution, forbidding the extension of official protections to those who suffer discrimination due to their sexual orientation, violate the 14th A's Equal Protection Clause?
Majority: KENNEDY: Yes. The Court held that A 2 singled out homosexual and bisexual persons, imposing on them a broad disability by denying them the right to seek and receive specific legal protection from discrimination. Kennedy noted oftentimes a law will be sustained under the equal protection clause, even if it seems to disadvantage a specific group, so long as it can be shown to "advance a legitimate government interest." "If the constitutional conception of 'equal protection of the laws' means anything, it must at the very least mean that a bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest."
Dissent: SCALIA, REHNQUIST, THOMAS: The constitutional amendment before us here is not the manifestation of a "`bare . . . desire to harm'" homosexuals, but is rather a modest attempt by seemingly tolerant Coloradans to preserve traditional sexual mores against the efforts of a politically powerful minority to revise those mores through use of the laws. That objective, and the means chosen to achieve it, are not only unimpeachable under any constitutional doctrine hitherto pronounced (hence the opinion's heavy reliance upon principles of righteousness rather than judicial holdings); they have been specifically approved by the Congress and by this Court.
Baehr V. Lewin (1993): Gay Marriage, Equal Rights
The Hawaii Supreme Ct. (NOT the S. Ct.) remanded law prohibiting gay marriage violated equal rights A. under Hawaii const. (The prohibition did not violate right to privacy.) Marriage has benefits, and is also a vital right essential to orderly pursuit of happiness.
Constitutional Law – Spring 1999 1
Federalism - Vertical distribution of government power 1
Implied powers - McCulloch v. Maryland – Bank of the U.S. 2
Commerce clause 5
Spending power 19
Dormant commerce clause (DCC) – Protection against facial discrimination 21
10th Amendment - Implied limitations on congressional power - 25
Other Federalism premises 33
Separation of powers - Horizontal distribution of national power 43
Judicial review 44
Jurisdiction and standing 49
Political question doctrine 54
Executive authority - domestic 58
Executive privilege 60
Presidential immunity 63
Impeachment 65
Bicameralism and presentment 66
Administrative agencies and the separation of powers 69
Non delegation doctrine and “quasi-constitutional” statutes 76
Executive authority – foreign 80
Legislative authority - foreign 83
Other separation of powers premises 84
Individual rights 90
Equal protection 91
Privileges or immunities – 14th Amendment 101
Incorporation 102
Contracts clause - Protecting economic liberties - Textual 104
Privacy, personhood, and family - Modern Substantive due process 115
Case Summaries 139
Constitutional Law – Spring 1999 1
Federalism - Vertical distribution of government power 1
A government of enumerated powers - Why does federalism matter? 1
Implied powers - McCulloch v. Maryland – Bank of the U.S. 2
Commerce clause 5
Three regulated categories under commerce clause 5
Channels 5
Instrumentalities 5
“Substantially affecting” commerce 5
Pre New Deal 6
Gibbons v. Ogden – New York steamboat monopoly 6
United States v. E.C. Knight - Manufacture vs. commerce – Sugar monopoly 7
Substantial economic effects and stream of commerce 7
The Shreveport Rate Cases – Substantial economic effects – Railroad rates 7
Stafford v. Wallace - Stream of commerce 8
Police power 8
Champion v. Ames - The Lottery Case 8
Hammer v. Dagenhart - Child labor 8
Summary of pre-New Deal law on commerce clause 9
The New Deal Crisis and the Rise of the Welfare State 9
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States 10
Carter v. Carter Coal Co. 11
Modern Trend 11
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. - Expanded “substantial economic effect” 11
Wickard v. Filburn - The “cumulative effect” theory 12
United States v. Darby - police power regulations - Minimum wage 13
Civil rights cases and the commerce clause 14
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States – Local incident of interstate commerce 14
Katzenbach v. McClung – Ollie’s BBQ 14
Effect of Lopez 15
Judicial abdication during New Deal 15
United States v. Lopez – Latest word – Guns and schools do mix 16
Reconciling Lopez with New Deal 18
Current status of commerce clause 19
Does Lopez provide workable rule of law? 19
Spending power 19
United States v. Butler - Beyond enumerated powers 19
Steward Machine Co. v. Davis 21
South Dakota v. Dole - National drinking age 21
Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman 21
Dormant commerce clause (DCC) – Protection against facial discrimination 21
Gibbons v. Ogden – New York steamboat monopoly 22
Willson v. Black Bird Creek Marsh Co. 22
Cooley v. Board of Port Wardens (1851) – “Cooley test” – That which is by nature national 22
Modern DCC doctrine 22
City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey – DCC – No solid waste 22
West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy – Milk tax subsidizes in-state farmers 23
Bobbitt’s modalities and the DCC? 23
Market participant exception under commerce clause 25
Reeves, Inc. v. Stake 25
10th Amendment - Implied limitations on congressional power - 25
National League of Cities v. Usery - Traditional government functions test 25
Garcia v. San Antonio MTA - Overruled National League of Cities – Minimum wage 25
Use of state’s lawmaking mechanisms 27
New York v. United States - Waste disposal 27
Printz v. United States – Brady Bill – Don’t No commandeer state executive 29
Possible McCulloch theory underlying New York and Printz 31
U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton 31
Other Federalism premises 33
The treaty and war powers 33
Missouri v. Holland – Migratory birds 33
Woods v. Cloyd W. Miller Co. 33
The taxing power 33
Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co. 33
The guarantee clause and the reconstruction amendments 34
Texas v. White 34
Validity of 13th and 14th Amendments 34
The power to enforce the reconstruction amendments 35
Katzenbach v. Morgan – Spanish speaking voters 35
City of Boerne v. Flores – RFRA Unconstitutional 35
Limitations on state regulation 38
Typology of Powers 38
Preemption 38
The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV 39
United Building Council v. Camden - No market participant exception for PIC 39
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Ward 39
Facially neutral statutes with significant effects on interstate commerce 40
Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland 40
Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm’n 41
Separation of powers - Horizontal distribution of national power 43
Distribution of national power - Why does separation of powers matter? 43
Formalism vs. functionalism 43
Judicial review 44
Marbury v. Madison – Supreme Court review of congressional statutes 44
Theoretical foundation of judicial review 46
Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee – Supreme Court review of state court decisions 47
Judicial exclusivity 48
Cooper v. Aaron - Federal judiciary is supreme – SCt binds states 48
Does judicial review imply judicial supremacy? 48
Departmentalism 48
Jurisdiction and standing 49
Ex Parte McCardle - Congressional control of appellate jurisdiction 49
United States v. Klein 50
Good confusion 50
Case or Controversy Requirement 50
Standing 50
Allen v. Wright - IRS tax-exempt status for segregated private school 51
Lujan v. Defenders of the Wildlife – Endangered Species Act 52
Raines v. Byrd - Line item veto 53
Perspective on cases 54
Political question doctrine 54
Baker v. Carr - Apportionment of the Tennessee Assembly 54
Luther v. Borden - Guaranty clause non-justiciable 56
Why is there a political question doctrine? 56
Davis v. Bandemer - Unconstitutional gerrymandering justiciable 56
Nixon v. United States - Impeachment non-justiciable 56
Coleman v. Miller - Congress gets to say whether USC has been amended 57
Timing and certiorari 57
Executive authority - domestic 58
Executive-Legislative conflicts 58
Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer - The Steel Seizure Case 58
Dames & Moore v. Regan - Iran hostage settlement 59
Executive privilege 60
United States v. Nixon – Watergate tapes 60
Reviewability of executive privilege decisions 61
Scope of executive privilege 62
National security interests 62
United States v. AT&T 62
Legislative Investigations and Civil Proceedings 63
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities v. Nixon 63
Dellums v. Powell 63
Lower level officials 63
Presidential immunity 63
Mississippi v. Johnson 63
Nixon v. Fitzgerald 63
Harlow v. Fitzgerald 64
Clinton v. Jones 64
Law and politics 64
Law versus politics 64
Nixon v. Administrator of General Services 64
Law as politics 65
Impeachment 65
Bicameralism and presentment 66
INS v. Chadha - One house veto provision stricken 66
General critique by Koppelman 67
Single-house actions approved by USC 68
Chadha in context - Legislative control of the bureaucracy 68
The reach of Chadha 68
Process Gas Consumers Group v. Consumers Energy Council of America 68
United States Senate v. FTC 68
A return to the text? 69
Future directions 69
Administrative agencies and the separation of powers 69
Meyers v. United States 70
The rise of independent agencies 70
Humphrey’s Executor v. United States - FTC member removal 70
Wiener v. United States - War Claims Commission removal 70
Buckley v. Valeo - Appointments Clause and FEC – Officer of the U.S. 71
Various assessments of Myers, Humphrey’s Executor, and Buckley. 71
Bowsher v. Synar - Good-bye Gramm-Rudman 72
Commitment and the budget 73
Appointments power - Congressional control over administrative officials 73
Chadha and Bowsher 73
Morrison and Bowsher 73
Koppelman on Morrison and Mistretta 74
Non-presidential appointments 74
Freytag v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 74
Weiss v. United States 74
Edmond v. United States 74
Justice Scalia’s Bowsher and Mistretta dissents 74
Congressional control of administrative agencies after Chadha and Bowsher 75
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority 75
Non delegation doctrine and “quasi-constitutional” statutes 76
Introduction 76
Non-delegation doctrine 76
Non-delegation and National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 (NIRA) 76
Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan 76
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States 76
Demise of non-delegation doctrine 77
Amalgamated Meat Cutters v. Connally 77
Touby v. United States 77
Loving v. United States 77
Arguments in favor of reviving non-delegation doctrine 77
D. Schoenbrod 77
Industrial Union v. American Petroleum Institute – Rehnquist dissent 77
Ely (Democracy and Distrust) 78
Stewart – against non delegation doctrine 78
Lowi’s assessment of the “new” Constitution 78
Structural statutes 79
Executive authority – foreign 80
Control of foreign affairs 80
United States v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. – Foreign arms sales embargo 80
Text, history, and presidential power 80
Functionalism and the autonomy of constitutional interpretation 80
Allocation of war making authority 81
Approaches toward reconciling these provisions 81
Prize Cases - President’s power to use armed forces 82
Orlando v. Laird – Vietnam non-justiciable 82
Dellums v. Bush – The Persian Gulf War 82
UN “peacekeeping” or “peace enforcement” 82
Legislative authority - foreign 83
The War Powers Resolution 83
War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional 83
The War Powers Resolution is constitutional 83
Practice under the Resolution 83
The Constitution without courts – War Powers and Boland 84
Other separation of powers premises 84
Treaties 84
Executive Agreements 84
Dames & Moore v. Regan - Constitutional limits on scope of executive agreements 84
United States v. Belmont 84
Congressional-executive agreements 85
Impoundment 85
Line item vetoes 85
Unfunded mandates 86
New York v. United States – No unfunded mandates – 10th Amendment 86
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995. 86
Contract with America 86
Constitutional amendment to balance the budget 86
Morrison v. Olson – Special prosecutor laws 87
Mistretta v. United States – U.S. Sentencing Commission 88
Final thoughts on separation of powers 89
Individual rights 90
Overview 90
Equal protection 91
Utility of equal protection analysis 91
Race and the Constitution 91
Slavery and the Constitution 91
State v. Post 91
Dred Scott v. Sanford 91
Reconstruction and retreat 92
Strauder v. West Virginia – Invalidated law barring blacks from juries 92
Plessy v. Ferguson – Separate but equal – Railroad cars 93
Equal protection methodology - strict scrutiny 94
Korematsu v. United States (Black 1944) – Japanese WWII interment 94
Overview of equal protection doctrine 96
The attack on Jim Crow 97
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (Brown I) – School desegregation 97
Bolling v. Sharpe - 14th Amendment equal protection federal via 5th Amendment 98
Brown II 99
Facially neutral laws that disadvantage minorities 100
Washington v. Davis 100
Privileges or immunities – 14th Amendment 101
The Slaughter-House Cases – New Orleans slaughtering monopoly 101
Slaugheter-House remains good law 102
Incorporation 102
Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore 103
Murray v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co. 103
Twining v. New Jersey 103
Palko v. Connecticut – Double jeopardy 103
Adamson v. California – Black dissent - Total incorporation 103
Duncan v. Louisiana 103
Contracts clause - Protecting economic liberties - Textual 104
Fletcher v. Peck – Corrupt land sale contract not voidable by State 104
Ogden v. Saunders – State bankruptcy law valid prospectively 105
Calder v. Bull – Ex post facto - Historical Modality – Criminal only 105
Home Building and Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell 106
Modern contracts clause law and AK analysis 106
Substantive due process - Protecting economic interests - “Redistribution” 107
Lochner v. New York – Time to make the donuts – No maximum hours for bakers 107
AK’s lecture on Lochner 108
Civil War makes Lochner look less crazy 109
Structural and ethical basis for Lochner holding 109
Dissent - Harlan 110
Dissent - Holmes 110
Forming an opinion of Lochner 110
Lochner Era - most significant judicial interventions in American history 111
Munn v. Illinois - Escape hatch from Lochner – “Public interest” 111
Muller v. Oregon – Another escape hatch – Women “special class” 111
Bailey v. Alabama – Personal service contracts enforced by jail time no more 112
Nebbia v. New York 113
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish – The death of Lochner – Female minimum wage 113
United States v. Carolene Products Co. – Filled milk 113
Williamson v. Lee Optical - Full employment for ophthalmologists 114
Ferguson v. Skrupa 114
Summary of substantive due process - Economic rights 114
Privacy, personhood, and family - Modern Substantive due process 115
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette - Overview 115
The right of privacy 115
Individual rights after the New Deal 115
Meyer v. Nebraska – Okay to teach foreign language to school children 116
Pierce v. Society of Sisters 116
Griswold v. Connecticut - Condommania 116
Eisenstadt v. Baird 119
Abortion 119
Roe v. Wade 119
Roe and Griswold 121
Planned Parenthood v. Casey – Abortion waiting period and other restrictions 121
AK’s approach to abortion question 127
Bowers v. Hardwick - Sodomy 128
Washington v. Glucksberg - Physician-assisted suicide 131
Sex and sexual orientation 134
Reed v. Reed 134
Frontiero v. Richardson – Classification based on sex inherently suspect 134
Craig v. Boren – Beer sales to 18 – 20 year-old women only, not men 134
United States v. Virginia – VMI gender integration 135
Other Candidates for heightened scrutiny 136
Romer v. Evans – Special rights for gays 136
Case Summaries 139
Strauder v. West Virginia (1880): 14th Amendment 139
Peters v. Kiff (1972): 14th Amendment 139
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896): 13th, 14th Amendments 139
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): 14th Amendment, Equal Protection 139
Bolling v. Sharpe (1954): 5th Amendment, Equal Protection, Due Process 140
Marbury v. Madison (1803): Judicial Review, Interpret Constitution 140
Cooper v. Aaron (1958): Judicial Review, Interpret Constitution 140
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. Ed. (1971): 14th Amendment, Segregation 141
Freeman v. Pitts (1992): 14th Amendment, School Desegregation 141
Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee (1816): Supremacy Clause, Judicial Review 141
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Implied Power, 10th Amendment 142
US Term Limits v. Thornton (1995): 10th Amendment, Term Limits 142
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824): Commerce Clause, Federal v. States 143
US v. E.C. Knight (1895): Commerce, Anti-Trust 143
Champion v. Ames [lottery case] (1903): Commerce 144
Swift & Co. v. US (1905): Commerce, “Current of Commerce” 144
The Shreveport Rate Case (1914): Commerce, “close and substantial relation” 144
Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918): Commerce, 10th Amendment 145
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin (1937) Commerce Clause, New Deal legislation 145
US v. Darby (1941): Commerce Clause, Child Labor, Manufacturing 146
Heart of Atlanta Motel (1964): Commerce Clause, Civil Rights Act 1964 146
Katzenbach v. McClung (1964): Commerce Clause, Civil Rights Act 1964 146
US v. Lopez (1995): Commerce Clause, Guns in school zone 147
South Dakota v. Dole (1987): Commerce Clause, 21st Amendment 148
Missouri v. Holland (1920): 10th Amendment 148
Katzenbach v. Morgan (S.Car.) (1966): 14th A., Due Process, Literacy to Vote 148
Boerne City v. Flores (1997): 1st A. Free exercise v. 14th A. Legislative authority 148
Jones v. Mayer Co. (1968): 13th Amendment, Equal Housing 149
Garcia v. San Antonio Metro Transit Auth. (1985) 10th A., Federalism 150
New York v. United States (1992): 10th Amendment, Supremacy Clause 150
Printz v. United States (1997): 10th A., Commerce Clause, Original Intent 151
Cooley v. Board of Wardens (1852): Federalism, Concurrent Powers 152
City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey (1978): Dormant Commerce Clause 152
Kassel v. Consolidated Freightways Corp. (1981): Safety v. Commerce 153
West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy (1994): Interstate Commerce 153
Corfield v. Coryell (1823): Privilege and Immunity Clause 153
United Bldg. v. Camden (1984) Privilege & Immunity v. Commerce Clause 154
Youngstown Co. v. Sawyer (1952): Separation of Powers, Emergency power 154
US v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. (1936) Separation of Power, External v. Internal 154
Dames & Moore v. Regan (1981): Implicit powers 154
Korematsu v. United States (1944): Emergency Executive Order 154
United States v. Nixon (1974): Executive Privilege 155
Clinton v. Jones (1997): Separation of Powers, Presidential Immunity 156
Mistretta v. United States (1989) “Non delegation” of Congressional Power 156
INS v. Chadha (1983): Legislative Veto 156
Clinton v. City of New York (1998): Separation of Powers, Line Item Veto 157
Bowsher v. Synar: (1986): Separation of Powers 157
Morrison v. Olson (1988): Separation of Powers, Independent Counsel 157
Northern Pipeline Co. v. Marathon (1982): Separation of powers, delegation 157
Commodity Futures T.C. v. Schor (1986): Separation of Power, delegation 158
Ex Parte McCardle (1869) Separation of Powers, Exceptions clause 158
Baker v. Carr (1962): Limits on Judicial Power, Political Questions 159
Nixon v. United States (1993): Limits, Political Question 159
Raines v. Byrd (1997): Limits, Standing 159
Allen v. Wright (1984): Limits, Standing 160
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1975): Limits, Standing 160
Missouri v. Jenkins (II) (1990): Limit, Scope of remedy 160
Missouri v Jenkins (III) (1995): Limits Jurisdiction 161
Fletcher v. Peck (1810): Economic Liberties, Property Rights 161
Ogden v. Saunders (1827): Economic Liberties, Contracts Clause 162
Calder v. Bull: (1798): Economic Liberties, Ex post facto 162
The Slaughter House Cases (1873): Economic Liberties, 13th, 14th A, Monopolies 163
Palko v. Connecticut (1937): Double Jeopardy, Due Process (14th A.) 163
Adamson v. California (1947): 5th A. not part of Due Process (14th A.) 164
Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942): Due Process, Sterilization 164
Lochner v. New York (1905): Substantive Due Process, Freedom to Contract 165
Bailey v. Alabama (1910): 13th A., Race Discrimination 165
West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937): 5th, 14th A., Freedom to Contract 166
Williamson v. Lee Optical (1955): 14th A., Due Process, Judicial Power 166
Meyer v. Nebraska (1923): 14th A., Due Process, Privacy 167
Poe v. Ullman (1961): 14th A., Due Process, Individual Rights, “Ripeness” 167
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965): 14th, 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th A., Privacy 168
Roe v. Wade (1973): Privacy, Abortion (9th, 14th A.) 168
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992): Privacy, Abortion 169
Bowers v. Hardwick (1986): Fundamental Rights, Sodomy, 8th A. 170
Washington v. Glucksberg (1997): Privacy, Right to Die, 14th A. 171
Railway Express Agency v. New York (1949): 14th A., Rational Basis review 171
FCC v. Beach Communications (1993): 5th, 14th A, Rational Basis Review 172
Bradwell v. Illinois (1873): 14th A., Gender Discrimination 172
Frontiero v. Richardson (1973): 5th A., Gender Discrimination 173
Craig v. Boren (1976): 14th A., Gender Discrimination 173
U.S. v. Virginia (1996): 14th A., Gender Discrimination 173
Watkins v. U.S. Army (1989): 14th A, Gay Discrimination, Status v. Conduct 175
Romer v. Evans (1996): 14th A., Gay Discrimination, political participation 175
Baehr v. Lewin (1993): Gay Marriage, Equal Rights 175
Cases
Adamson v. California 130, 199
Adkins v. Children’s Hospital 139, 141
Allen v. Wright 63, 64, 196
Amalgamated Meat Cutters v. Connally 82, 97
Baehr v. Lewin 209
Bailey v. Alabama 141, 161, 201
Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co 40
Baker v. Carr 67, 71, 143, 195
Barron v. Baltimore 128
Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore 130
Bolling v. Sharpe 123, 179
Bowers v. Hardwick 164, 177, 204
Bowsher v. Synar 89, 194
Bradwell v. Illinois 206
Breyer 37, 66, 79, 168, 171, 196
Brown II 124, 178
Brown v. Board of Education 59, 122, 123, 156, 160, 178, 197
Buckley v. Valeo 88
Carter v. Carter Coal Co 12
Champion v. Ames 9, 182
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah 43
City of Boerne v. Flores 43, 46, 186
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center 163
City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey 28, 189
Clinton v. City of New York 193
Clinton v. Jones 79, 192
Coleman v. Miller 65, 70
Commodity Futures T.C. v. Schor 194
Cooley v. Board of Port Wardens 27, 188
Cooper v. Aaron 56, 58, 75, 179
Coppage v. Kansas 140
Corfield v. Coryell 190
Craig v. Boren 120, 171, 207
Dames & Moore v. Regan 72, 106, 191
Davis v. Bandemer 69
Dellums v. Bush 103
Dellums v. Powell 77
Dept. of Agriculture v. Moreno 176
Dred Scott v. Sanford 58, 59, 115, 116
Duncan v. Louisiana 131
Edmond v. United States 93
Eisenstadt v. Baird 150
El Paso v. Simmons 134
Employment Division v. Smith 43
Ex Parte McCardle 60, 195
Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland 48, 114
FCC v. Beach Communications 205
Ferguson v. Skrupa 136, 144
Flast v. Cohen 63
Fletcher v. Peck 131, 132, 134, 197
Freeman v. Pitts 180, 197
Freytag v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 93
Frontiero v. Richardson 171, 206
Garcia v. San Antonio Metro Transit Auth 31, 187
Gibbons v. Ogden 7, 27, 182, 184
Griswold v. Connecticut 146, 147, 153, 203
Hammer v. Dagenhart 10, 11, 40, 183, 184
Harlow v. Fitzgerald 79
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States 18, 184
Heckler v. Chaney 75
Holden v. Hardy 139
Home Building and Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell 133
Humphrey’s Executor v. United States 88
Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm’n 50, 114
Industrial Union v. American Petroleum Institute 97
INS v. Chadha 82, 85, 86, 91, 92, 108, 193
Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co 43, 45
Jones v. Mayer 162, 187
Kassel v. Consolidated Freightways Corp 189
Katzenbach v. McClung 23, 185
Katzenbach v. Morgan 19, 42, 44, 46, 128, 186
Korematsu v. United 118, 120, 192
Lassiter v. Northampton Election Board 42
Lochner v. New York 58, 59, 118, 128, 132, 135, 136, 137, 138, 142, 147, 200
Loving v. United States 97
Lujan v. Defenders of the Wildlife 64, 196
Marbury v. Madison 32, 44, 53, 54, 57, 74, 75, 179
Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee 57, 180
Mathews v. Lucas 120
McCulloch v. Maryland 32, 38, 39, 60, 181
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Ward 48
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority 94, 95
Meyer v. Nebraska 146, 152, 202
Meyers v. United States 87
Mills v. Habluetzel 120
Mississippi v. Johnson 78
Missouri v. Holland 39, 186
Missouri v. Jenkins 197
Mistretta v. United States 111, 193
Moore v. East Clevland 164
Morrison v. Olson 109, 194
Munn v. Illinois 140
Murray v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co 130
NAACP v. Alabama 148
National League of Cities v. Usery 24, 31, 32, 187
Nebbia v. New York 140, 142
New York v. United States 33, 35, 36, 108, 113, 188
Nixon v. Administrator of General Services 79
Nixon v. Fitzgerald 78, 79
Nixon v. United States 69, 80, 195
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp 14, 184
Northern Pipeline Co. v. Marathon 194
Ogden v. Saunders 132, 198
Orlando v. Laird 103
Palko v. Connecticut 130, 164, 199
Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan 96
Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman 26
Perez v. Campbell 47
Perez v. U.S. 24
Peters v. Kiff 178
Pierce v. Society of Sisters 146, 152
Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc. 28
Planned Parenthood v. Casey 151, 153, 154, 204
Plessy v. Ferguson 160, 178
Poe v. Ullman 149, 202
Printz v. U.S. 33, 36, 188
Prize Cases 103
Process Gas Consumers Group v. Consumers Energy Council of America 85
Railway Express Agency v. New York 205
Raines v. Byrd 65, 196
Reed v. Reed 171
Reeves, Inc. v. Stake 31
Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp 47
Roe v. Wade 59, 151, 153, 154, 160, 203, 204
Romer v. Evans 175, 208
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States 12, 96
Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities v. Nixon 77
Shaw v. Delta Air Lines 46
Sherbert v. Verner 43
Skinner v. Oklahoma 200
Slaughter-House Cases 127, 128, 137, 144, 199
South Dakota v. Dole 26, 185
Stafford v. Wallace 9, 12
Stanley v. Georgia 164, 166
State v. Post 114
Steward Machine Co. v. Davis 26
Strauder v. West Virginia 116, 117, 118, 178
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. Ed. 180
Swift & Co. v. US 183
Texas v. White 41
Touby v. United States 97
Twining v. New Jersey 130
United Building & Constr. Trades Council v. Camden 47, 190
United States Senate v. FTC 85
United States Trust v. New Jersey 131
United States v. AT&T 77
United States v. Belmont 106
United States v. Butler 25, 29
United States v. Carolene Products Co 142, 144
United States v. Curtiss-Wright Corp 100, 191
United States v. E.C. Knight 8, 182
United States v. Klein 61
United States v. Lopez 20, 23, 26, 113, 185
United States v. Nixon 74, 192
United States v. Virginia 173, 207
US v. Darby 16, 184
Washington v. Davis 121, 125
Washington v. Glucksberg 167, 205
Watkins v. U.S. Army 208
Weiss v. United States 93
West Coast Hotel v. Parrish 15, 138, 142, 201
West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy 29, 190
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette 145
Whitney v. Robertson 106
Wickard v. Filburn 5, 15, 18, 19, 72, 185
Wiener v. United States 88
Williamson v. Lee Optical 144, 202
Willson v. Black Bird Creek Marsh Co 27
Woods v. Cloyd W. Miller Co. 40
Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (The Steel Seizure Case) 71, 191
Statutes
13th Amendment 141, 161, 162, 163, 178, 187
14th Amendment 58, 117, 118, 120 - 123, 127 - 128, 130, 135 - 138, 146, 149 - 152, 163 - 165, 178, 180, 199, 203, 205
21st Amendment 185
2nd Amendment 37
5th Amendment 115, 123, 130, 179
8th A 164, 165, 205
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 25
Art. II, §4 80
Article I, § 8 1, 2, 25, 29, 63, 64, 82
Article I, §10 106, 132
Article I, §3, Clause 6 69
Article II, §1 71
Article II, §2 105, 109
Article III, §3 71
Article III. §2 54, 55, 57, 59
Article IV 47, 68, 99, 127
Article IV, §2 127
Article V, §6 106
Bill of Rights 1, 2, 3, 115, 130, 145, 149, 150, 199, 200
Brady Bill 36
Child Labor Tax Law of 1919 40
Civil Rights Act of 1964 180
Ethics in Government Act 109
Gramm-Rudman Act 89, 92
Housing and Rent Act of 1947 40
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 107
Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 34
National Industrial Recovery Act 96
Ninth Amendment 149
Religious Freedom Restoration Act 43, 187
Sixth Amendment 131
Stewart 28, 98, 150, 152, 203
Taft-Harley Act 71
Title II of 1964 Civil Rights Act 19
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act 108, 112
War Powers Resolution 104
Other Authorities
Ackerman 19, 42, 106, 145, 147
Blackmun 65, 93, 111, 151, 153, 159, 160, 165, 166, 180, 187, 203, 205
Bork 123, 124
Brennan 63, 67, 68, 70, 80, 131, 150, 161, 194, 203, 205, 206
Brown 117
Burger 50, 74, 75, 82, 89, 95, 153, 165, 180
Calabresi 24, 123
Cardozo 14, 26, 130, 134, 144, 199
Chase 132, 133, 136, 198, 199
Chermerinsky 62
Clark 18
Curtis 130
Day 10
Douglas 72, 144, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 153, 191, 200
Easterbrook 58, 66
Ely 5, 48, 98, 102, 103, 105, 114, 121, 136, 143
Federalist 47(Madison) 52
Federalist 48 (Madison) 52
Flaherty 53
Frankfurter 68, 71, 128, 129, 131
Fuller 8
Golove 106
Grier 103
Harlan 8, 10, 117, 118, 135, 139, 149, 150, 151, 182
Holmes 10, 39, 136, 139, 141, 146, 200
Hughes 9, 12, 14, 133, 141, 142, 184
Iridell 133
Jackson 15, 16, 19, 28, 30, 58, 71, 72, 104, 119, 145, 191, 200
Jefferson Powell 35
Kennedy 65, 97, 154, 175, 176, 180, 188, 204, 209
Lessig 24
Lincoln 59
Locke 136, 138
Lowi 98
Marshall 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 16, 19, 27, 30, 39, 53, 54, 55, 57, 61, 62, 67, 74, 90, 128, 130, 131, 132, 179, 181, 182, 189, 198, 203, 205
Miller 127, 128, 137
Murphy 119
O’Connor 63, 151, 154, 168, 170, 180, 194, 204
Peckham 135, 138, 147
Powell 32, 35, 78, 164, 165, 194, 205
Rehnquist 65, 69, 72, 73, 83, 93, 97, 98, 104, 109, 153, 158, 159, 160, 161, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 173, 185, 188, 189, 194, 205
Roberts 25, 142, 184
rpretat 58, 59, 73, 75, 103, 137
Sager 64, 126
Scalia 64, 93, 94, 110, 111, 161, 174, 175, 176, 177, 188, 193, 204
Schoenbrod 97
Souter 66, 70, 154, 168, 170, 171, 180, 188, 204
Stevens 65, 66, 79, 90, 94, 159, 166, 168, 170, 180, 188, 192, 205
Stone 16, 25, 28, 30, 48, 142, 184
Story 57, 180
Strong 116
Sutherland 12, 100, 138, 191, 202
Taft 9, 71, 87
Taney 115, 116
Thomas 22, 36, 38, 39, 53, 185, 188
Tribe 75, 76, 84, 106
Vinson 72
Warren 122, 123, 124, 178, 203
Wechsler-Choper 32
Werhan 53
White 69, 70, 79, 83, 85, 86, 91, 95, 125, 131, 150, 153, 164, 165, 194, 204
1
10th Amendment 6, 9, 12, 13, 25, 27, 28, 29, 31, 33, 86
A
abortion 48, 91, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 168, 169
Abortion 119, 121, 126, 127, 131
Adams 44
Agricultural Adjustment Act 12
Appellate Jurisdiction 49
Appointments Clause 71
B
bakery 107
Bank of the United States 3
bicameralism and presentment 66
Bituminous Coal Conservation Act 11
Boland Amendments 84
C
Case or Controversy 50
Case or Controversy Requirement 49
Certiorari 57
Chadha 66, 67, 68, 69, 73, 75, 79, 83
Checks and Balances 43
Child Labor Case 8
class of acts 12
Commerce Clause 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 22, 25, 26, 38, 39, 40, 41, 106, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 151, 152, 153, 154
Concurrent powers 38
Congressional-Executive Agreements 85
contraceptives 116, 117, 119, 125
Contracts Clause 90, 104, 106, 162
Counter-majoritarian 48
Countermajoritarian difficulty 46
critique 6, 62, 66, 67, 87, 98, 99, 108, 110, 114, 130
Critique 3, 9, 28, 33, 45, 62, 75, 99, 117, 119, 124
cumulative effect 12
D
DCC 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 40
Departmentalism 48
desegregation order 48
Disproportionate impact 96
Doctrinal Modality 24
Doctrine of Implied Powers 2
Dormant Commerce Clause 21, 152, 153
Double Jeopardy 163
Due Process 103, 107, 114, 118, 120, 123, 126, 129, 131, 133, 140, 148, 163, 164, 166, 167, 168, 171, 172, 173
Due Process Clause 103, 107, 114, 118, 120, 123, 126, 131, 133, 166, 168, 171, 172, 173
E
Economic Rights 114
enumerated powers 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 19, 28, 31
Equal Housing 149
Equal Protection 55, 91, 93, 96, 100, 128, 137
Establishment Clause 52
Ethical Argument 105
Ethical Modality 24
ex post facto 38, 105
Ex post facto 105, 162
Exceptions clause 158
Exclusive federal powers 38
Exclusive state powers 38
Executive Authority 58, 80
Executive Privilege 60, 61, 62, 155
F
Federal Election Commission 71
Formalism 43
Formalistic Argument 67
Functionalism 8, 28, 43, 80
G
GATT 85
gay marriage 175
Gender Discrimination 172, 173
gerrymandering 56
Good confusion 50
Guarantee Clause 34
guaranty clause 55, 56
Guaranty Clause 55
Gun Free Schools 16
H
habeus corpus 49
Historical Modality 23
homosexual 126, 128, 129, 130, 131, 136, 138, 170, 175
I
Impeachment 57, 65
Implicit powers 154
Impoundment 85
Incorporation Controversy 102
independent counsel 79, 87, 88
Independent Counsel 157
Interstate Commerce 7, 8, 144, 153
Iranian hostage 59
J
Judicial Exclusivity 48
judicial review 18, 44, 45, 46, 48, 50, 56, 57, 60, 61, 72, 84, 89, 96, 97, 100
Judicial review 56
Judicial Review 140, 141
JUDICIAL REVIEW 44
L
Legislative authority 83, 148
legislative veto 79
Legislative Veto 79, 156
liberalism 108
Liberalism 108, 109
liberty of contract 107, 110
line item veto 86
Line Item Veto 53
Lochner 98, 113, 115, 116, 165
lottery 8, 9, 144
Lottery Case 8, 9
M
Market Participant Exception 25
migratory birds 33
milk 23, 113
minimal scrutiny review 172
Minimal Scrutiny Test 96
Minimum wage 13
N
NAFTA 85
National Industrial Recovery Act 10
National Labor Relations Act 11
natural justice 105
Necessary and proper 2, 3
Necessary and proper\ 2
New Deal 9, 10, 11, 15, 18, 19, 29, 34, 48, 76, 77, 81, 106, 107, 114, 115, 116, 118
NJ landfills 22
NLRA 11
Non delegation 76, 156
non-justiciable 54, 55, 56, 57, 82
nondelegation doctrine 66, 71, 77, 78, 79, 86
Nondelegation doctrine 76, 78
Nondelegation Doctrine 76
O
Officer of U.S. 71
Ollie’s Barbecue 14
Originalist 105
Originalist/Historical Argument 105
OSHA 78
P
personal service contract 112
PIC 39, 101, 102, 108, 109
Planned Parenthood 116, 117, 119, 121
Political Constraints on SC 49
Political Question 159
Political Question Doctrine 54
Preemption 38
Presidential Immunity 156
Privileges and Immunities 39, 101
prudential argument 47
Prudential Modality 24, 51
Q
Quasi-suspect standard 96
R
Race Discrimination 165
Rational Basis review 171
Rational Basis Review 172
Reconstruction Amendments 34, 35
reserve powers 1
RFRA 36, 37
Right of Privacy 115
Ripeness 57, 167
S
separation of powers 1, 29, 43, 44, 52, 54, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 79, 80, 87, 88, 89, 90
Separation of powers 3, 43, 44, 52, 69, 87, 157
Separation of Powers 43, 89, 90, 154, 156, 157, 158
Shared powers 38
Slaughter-House Cases 101
Slavery 7, 91, 128
sodomy 126, 128, 129, 130, 131
Sovereignty 3
Sovereignty argument 47
Spatial privacy 130
special prosecutor 87, 88
Special prosecutor 87
Spending Power 19
Standard of Review 120
Standing 50
STANDING 160
Stare decisis 18
Stare Decisis 122, 126
State powers, conditional on federal permission 38
Sterilization 164
Strict Scrutiny Test 96
Structural Modality 24
Substantive Due Process 107, 114, 115, 165
suicide 126, 131, 132, 133
Supremacy Clause 38, 141, 150, 160
T
tax breaks 51
Taxing Power 33
Taxpayer Standing 52
Textual Modality 23
Treaty and War Powers 33
Truman 58, 63, 77
U
U.S. Sentencing Commission 88
Unfunded Mandates 86
V
Validity of 13th and 14th Amendments 34
W
War Powers 79, 83, 84, 89
Watergate 60, 62, 83, 87
