2) maggs_con_law_i_Actors and Behavior

2) maggs_con_law_i_Actors and Behavior - Congress MAY...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Congress v. Federal courts ~ Amend SC appellate jurisdiction (Art. III, § 2, cl. 2, Marbury , Ex Parte McCardle ) Congress v. President ~ Limit President's power to remove heads of at least some agencies by allowing removal only for specified causes (e.g., neglect, disability, etc.) ( Humphrey's Executor ) Congress in general ~ Exercise implied powers in the Constitution, by virtue of the Necessary and Proper clause, as long as the means used to achieve are reasonable and appropriate (art. I, § 8, cl, 18, McCulloch v. Maryland ) ~ Impose taxes as long as is actually regulating commerce, not penalizing ( United States v. Kahriger , but see Child Labor Tax Case ) ~ Spend for the general welfare ( United States v. Butler , Buckley v. Valeo ), as long as is not clearly wrong or arbitrary ( Helvering v. Davis ) ~ Repeal treaties by statute ( Whitney v. Robertson ) ~ Take property via the Necessary and Proper Clause ( ) ~ Pass laws by obeying the Presentment Clauses and fulfilling the bicameral requirement ( INS v. Chadha ) ~ Have power to remove head of agency that President cannot remove the head of, but only if the agency does not exercise executive power ( Bowsher v. Synar ) ~ Pass acts that apply to just one person if it's not intended to punish, have a legitimate purpose, is not overly burdensome, and provides just compensation if necessary ( Nixon v. Administrator of General Services ) ~ Vest power to appoint inferior officers in the President, the Courts, or Heads of Departments (Appointments Clause, Morrison v. Olson ) Congress v. States ~ Regulate intrastate activities that affect interstate commerce (Supremacy Clause, Gibbons v. Ogden ) ~ Regulate intrastate activity if the aggregate effect of things regulated would affect interstate commerce ( United States v. Darby, Wickard v. Filburn, Raich v. Gonzales ) ~ Preempt state law either by field preemption or by conflict preemption ( Silkwood ) ~ Regulate local activities that might have substantial and harmful effect upon commerce as long as there is a rational basis and uses reasonable and appropriate means ( Heart of Atlanta , Katzenbach v. McClung ) ~ Impose requirements on states that are not destructive to state sovereignty ( Garcia v. San Antonio ) ~ Encourage states to regulate by using 1) conditional spending and 2) preemptive federal regulation ( New York v. United States , Printz v. United States ) ~ Requirements for conditional spending, under South Dakota v. Dole : 1) in pursuit of general welfare 2) condition imposed unambiguously 3) related to federal interest 4) no "independent constitutional bar" 5) amount of money cannot be so coercive as to be excessive pressure that would compel/mandate the State Congress v. Private Parties ~ Deprive owner of one strand of bundle of property rights, esp. when no physical invasion or restraint is present (
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 4

2) maggs_con_law_i_Actors and Behavior - Congress MAY...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

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