This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Constitutional Law Outline-fall 2008 SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF FEDERAL BRANCHES • The Authority for Judicial Review (pg. 1-9) o Marbury v. Madison —establishes the authority for judicial review of both federal executive & legislative acts Can the Supreme Court declare laws unconstitutional? Marshall’s arguments • The Constitution imposes limits on government powers & that these limits are meaningless unless subject to judicial enforcement • It is inherent to the judicial role to decide the constitutionality of the laws that it applies • Court’s authority to decide “cases” arising under the Constitution implied the power to declare unconstitutional laws conflicting w/ the basic legal charter • Judges take an oath of office & that they would violate this oath if they enforced unconstitutional laws • The supremacy clause of Article VI could be viewed as a declaration that Congress only should enact laws if they are authorized by the Constitution. o City of Boerne v. Flores (pg.216-221)—illustrates that Marbury decision still of importance the power to interpret the Const in a case or controversy remain in the judiciary (pg 218) • Dispute about authority of Congress v. S. Ct to interpret the Const. • Case involved 14 th Amendment—5 th Clause of it gives Congress to enact laws protecting laws allowed by amendment o How do you do this w/out saying what these rights are? o Dred Scott v. Sandford (pg. 649-651) 1 st case since Marbury that S. Ct. invalidated another act of Congress • Invalidated the MO Compromise in which the states were trying to reach suitable compromise regarding slavery • In that case invoked Const w/ regard to property rights—African Americans simply being considered property On one hand, judicial review a good thing—somewhat impartial judges making a ruling rather than leaving to political process but judges not infallible (Dred Scott) SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF STATE ACTIONS (pg. 9-10) • Authority for Judicial Review of State Judgments o Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee (1816) —ruled that the Supreme Court had the jurisdiction and authority to review all state acts under the Constitution, laws, & treaties of the United States 1 Grant of jurisdiction to the Sup. Ct. in Article III over all cases w/in the judicial power of the U.S. was intended to included decisions in which federal issues arise in state cases State courts had to be subject to rulings of Sup Ct. in federal issues so that the meaning and application of the laws, treaties and Constitution of the U.S. would have a uniform interpretation and application throughout the country o Cohens v. Virginia (1821) —ruled that 11 th Amd was inapplicable in criminal cases when the state itself instituted suit This case upheld state prosecution of interstate sellers of lottery tickets, but in doing established its authority to review state criminal proceedings. Decision came at a time when there were severe challenged to the Court from...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 08/23/2009 for the course LAW Const Law taught by Professor Staff during the Spring '09 term at Miami University.
- Spring '09
- Constitutional Law