Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Less
Words and Framers Mix of Other Parts of Broad
Interpretations
Narrow important to
placement Intent Opinion Constitution
Originalists
Specific Natural
Intent Law
Processes
At time
of Gov‟t
Contemp.
Tradition
Values
Judicial Review
& Marshall’s Opinion in
Marbury v. Madison
Constitution is
Court’s Role in supreme law of
Interpreting the land and SCOTUS
Constitution is in charge of
interpreting Political powers, actions
respect the nation & not ind
Political & Discretionary Acts rights – conscience guides
Rights of Individuals
Beginning of
Political Question
Doctrine
Textual
Defenses
Judges take an
Appellate review of Supremacy Clause
oath to the
decisions arising Issues “especially – laws are made in
Constitution &
under the for the courts” pursuance of the
must uphold
Constitution Constitution
(hence review)
Judiciability Doctrine
Advisory
Standing
Opinions
Article III – “Cases & Controversies”
Linked to Desirability of Judicial Review
Broad & Narrow View – Policy Decision
“Personal injury fairly traceable to the D‟s allegedly
unlawful conduct and redressed by requested relief”
Actual Dispute
between Adverse
Must Bring
Litigants
Necessary Some
“Real & not
Change Injury In Fact Causation Redressabiltiy
hypothetical
controversy”
Hayburn Plout (a) distinct &
Washington Fairly traceable to the
Case Case: palpable, (b) not Whether ruling would
Question to action of D, generally
No overturn abstract or bind D and have an
No override Justices: measures Ps stake in
by C of a hypothetical, (c) effect for P
by Sec. of Refused to
consider the outcome
personally injured
Def of a answer b/c final
Aikan:
Supreme advisory and judgment Lyons: Mass v. EPA: Lujan: Access to
not (yes to Failure to show Congress giving Failure to
Court power to create IIF
information was
decision necessary prospective the possible – weight of report &
purchase airline enough to meet
tickets… whether standard
& in future injury whether concrete
litigation) (D: Marshall) injury is clear imminent enough Richard:
of a threat Actual payment of
child support not
(speculation)
guaranteed
Gibbons v. Ogden:
Broad interstate, but Area for Congressional Regulation = intermingled
considered a broad sphere and sharing among state commerce
of independence
Early Interpretation
*when only affects 1 state
Commerce = „traffic‟ & Limits to C reg based on effect on 1 state =
„interstate‟, „navigation‟, completely internal
„intermingled‟
EC Knight: direct effects test –
mfer is not commerce, no reg if
w/ no effect on other state
Katzenbach (1964):
Perez (1971):
Congressional Within state = completely within and does not
Loan-sharking, Congressional enactment
Authorization affect other States & not interfering with other
and basis for regulation (even criminal)
goals of govt; - the interstate nature of the
restaurant permitted regulation
Acting w/ Express Article II, Sec. 1 = “Executive powers;” Art. II, Sec. 3 = “Take Care Clause” Inaction by Congress OR
Congressional Conflicting
Authorization Congressional Action
Youngstown Framework:
“Highest Ebb” Jackson’s Concurrence “Lowest Ebb”
Appointments Clause, Art. II, Sec. 2, cl. 2 – President nominates w/ Advice &
Principle that Congress may not delegate its legislative power to
Consent from Senate, but may vest power for inferior officers in President, Courts
administrative agencies – generally eroded to standards of delegation
of Law, or Heads of Departments
Morrison
Has Cong delegated a leg power Analysis
inappropriately?
Principal Inferior
Officer Officer
Some means of
controlling the
actions of officer
are included –
then does not
violate sep of
powers