Chapter2Slides

Chapter2Slides - Constitutional Law-in order to have a...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–7. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Constitutional Law-in order to have a valid claim that your constitutional rights have been violated, it has to be the government that has done that Over 200 years old  General in nature  Federalism  Enumerated powers Washington can only do the things that the constitution specifically allows them to do In the 10 th Amendment  Separation of powers  Checks and balances (veto)- Federal means sharing between D.C. and state- Today, is generally just refers/thought about D.C. Is it the government who is engaging in the conduct?  If so, does the conducts accomplishment justify the infringement?  A balancing of the conducts goals and the infringement- Applies to government: applies to all levels of government (city, CU, County)-- constitutional rights are not absolute, some things are customary/proper--ex. Yell fire in crowded theater- 1.gov. engaging in conduct- 2.rule or law justify rule of infringement--think about what is public/ government run --airports--cant prevent you from handing out flyers---go to flatirons mall they can tell you not to- AMTRAK station 4 billion subsidy from govt-- is it gov or private?- - court said it is close enough to govt--Give and Take in lawnot always just black and white--discrimination, student discount legal--on sex -- illegal Federal government regulates commerce only if it crosses state lines  Situation in 1787?  Situation in 2008?  Same rule, different result  Feds can regulate most commerce -changing interpretations of court to become opposite of original -foreign nations, 2 states -interpret commerce differently Feds can regulate any commerce affecting interstate commerce  States can pass laws that dont: Conflict with federal laws Put a burden on interstate commerce -do states still have power -Dormant commerce clause -state cant conflict with federal law --- federal overrules 1824 Gibbons v. Ogden : Fed can regulate if Substantially affects Interstate commerce  1942 Filburn : Home wheat consumption?...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/22/2009 for the course BCOR 3000 taught by Professor Morley during the Fall '07 term at Colorado.

Page1 / 15

Chapter2Slides - Constitutional Law-in order to have a...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 7. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online