Con Law-The Marshall Court

Front 1

What are Madison's 5 rules of Constitutional Interp

Back 1

1. The essential characteristic of the federal gov is limited to enumerated powers--> to interpret the C in a way which destory's this idea cannot be just
2. If the meaning is clear, then the consequences are not in question--> but when meaning is doubtful then you look to the consequences for correct interp
3. Drafters of the Constitution are the best interpreters--this means we should look at the public debate surronding the ratification and think what the words must have meant to the people back then
4. Contemporary debates on the interpretation of the text are reasonable evidence of the meaning
5. If we construe something to be constitutional, we must determine that it was either expressly authorized or so important as to be implicitly granted

Front 2

What were Madison's, Jefferson's and Randolph's arguments against the bank?

Back 2

1. it was not an enumerated power to create the bank
2. "Slippery slope"- if we let gov do this they can do anything
3. "Necessary" from "Necessary and Proper" doesn't mean convenient if it did it would "swallow up" the delegated powers.

Front 3

Whats was Hamilton's view on the bank?

Back 3

i. {Hamilton proposed an extremely strong federal gov.}
ii. If you take J’s and R’s view the federal gov won’t be able to do anything- “Light house” example.
iii. Governments have inherent powers to employ the means necessary to reach requisite ends
1. Cannot use means to reach ends not specified in Constitution
a. Preserves idea that federal gov has limited powers, but w/ respect to those powers gov has wide choice of means for carrying them out
2. Test isIf the end is clearly w/in any of the specified powers, and the means has an obvious relation to that end (and is not prohibited by any particular provision of the constitution) then it’s okay
a. Borrowing money is a means not an ends, (need money for the government to run)
iv. Necessary = needful, requisite, incidental, useful, conducive to (very different from other 3’s view of Necessary)

Front 4

McCulloch v. Maryland:
What is the holding?

Back 4

Under the Necessary and Proper clause, Congress may enact legislation as long as its ends are legitimate under the constitution and the legislation is appropriate and plainly adapted to those ends.

Front 5

What were the 2 issues presented is McCulloch v. Maryland and how were they decided?

Back 5

1. Was the bank Constitutional? Yes
-- Necessary and Proper--Necessary= conducive, useful... (Hamilton)
--C is an outline not a legal code
2. Can State Tax the bank?
--No, power to tax=power to destroy
--Bright line rule-- states may not tax federal gov. -- problem with representation

Front 6

What was the rational for the decision in McCulloch v, Maryland?

Back 6

1. History Marshall invoked the history of the 1st Bank of the Untied States as authority for the constitutionality of the 2nd.
2. made to refute the states contention that the states retain ultimate sovereignty because they ratified the constitution. (if states are soveirgn they can veto federal action)
a. Marshall reject this viewPeople are sovereign not the states.
3. W/in its sphere of action, federal law is supreme
4. Scope of Constitutional power: Broad scope of Congressional Authority Non-originalist view:
a. Constitution isn’t a code—it sketches out the big picture w/ details to follow, allowing for flexibility
5. Necessary and proper clause allows for adaptability
a. Federal powers necessarily imply the power to do and chose the means to execute them
b. Necessary and proper clause limits this power
i. Necessary = convenient, useful
1. Drafters purposely chose not to write “absolutely necessary” as they did in other parts of the text
2. As a practical matter, a rigid construction of the clause doesn’t work
6. Necessary and proper clause is placed in Article I, §8 which expands congress’ power not in Article I §9 which restricts congress’ power.
7. LIMITS If “Congress acts under a pretext” then the judiciary has the power to strike down federal laws by determining that the ends don’t justify the means

Front 7

What were Marshall's Methods of Constitutional Interpretation.

Back 7

1. Text
2.Theory and Structure of C
3. History
4. Consequences
5. Precedent
6. nation ethos-

Front 8

What was the holding of Martin v. Hunters Lessee?
Issue?
Rational

Back 8

Allowed for federal judicial review over state civil cases
Issue-Whether S.Court has appellate jxi over cases decided by state courts
Rational?
1. State interest might hamper the admistration of the federal constitution
2. Uniformity- otherwise constitution could mean different things in different states

Front 9

What was the holding in Cohens v. VA?
Rational?

Back 9

"Martin v. HUnters Lessee" applies to state criminal cases as well
Rational? Protection of individual's rights
-at this point in time Bill of Rights didnt apply to states.
-Concern that states would use criminal law to fustrate federal law (i.e. they could arrest federal employees)
-life tenure judges free from political pressure

Front 10

Marbury v. Madison?
Rational?

Back 10

Established judicial review of federal actions and the power to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional?
ionale:
a. Constitution imposes limits on gov powers and these limits are meaningless unless subject to judicial enforcement.
b. The Constitution is “law” and it is the duty and province of the judiciary to declare what the law is
c. Not explicitly stated in the text, but implied
i. Art III gives judiciary FQ jxi power to interpret the Constitution
ii. Art VI, sec 3—Oath of Office to uphold C so, gives judiciary right to declare laws unconstitutional
iii. Art VI, sec 2—Supremacy Clause, means the judiciary must adhere to the Constitution rather than bow to Congress
4. Advantages of this decision:
a. Promotes stability
b. Prevents legislators from taking short-term view or passing ambiguous legislation
c. Casts judiciary in role of protector
d. Structural checks and balances

Front 11

Fletcher v. Peck

Back 11

1.The first time the Court declares a state law unconstitutional
2.Facts:
a.GA legislature was bribed to sell land to private parties at a low price, those parties then sold to 3rd parties
b.A year later the GA legislature repealed the land grant since it was done in bad faith
3.Holding:
a.GA’s attempt to legislatively repeal the conveyance was a violation of the K clause. These were vested property rights.
i.K clause applies to K’s made by states as well as K’s b/t private parties.
4.Rationale:
a.Repeal violated the Contracts Clause (Art 10, sec 1), which prohibits any state from passing a law that inhibits private Ks
b.Marshall says the decision is based either on “general principles particular to our institutions” (i.e. natural law tradition) or “provisions of the Constitution” (i.e. K Clause)
i.He does this to accommodate Justice Johnson, who didn’t buy K Clause rationale

Front 12

Dartmouth College?

Back 12

1. Private institution founded before Civil War, when corporate charters were relatively rare
a. New Hampshire wanted to take over Dartmouth, but to do so it had to modify Dartmouth’s charter
2. Court said that this was unconstitutional (violated K Clause) b/c the state could not unilaterally change a private institution’s charter

Front 13

What was the combined effect of Flechter v. Peck and Dartmouth College

Back 13

a. Protection of private institutions and private industries
b. Commercial development gained freedom from gov. intervention

Front 14

Cases and holding on American Indians:

Back 14

i. Johnson and Graham’s Lessee v. William M’Intosh (1823)- Indian tribes can only sell land to US Government not private parties. U.S. Owns land through conquest. (reasoning here: does the fact that we took their land under English law justify our actions, Marshall says  yes.

ii.Cherokee Nation v.Georgia- For purposes of Federal jurisdiction, Indian tribes are not foreign nations, rather they are domestic dependent nations. i.e. no federal jurisdiction.


iii. Worcester v. GA
1. Holding: All GA’s anti-Indian laws were unconstitutional, federal gov has exclusive relationship with the Indian tribes.
2. Rationale: State has no force of law w/in Indian territories
a. Only federal gov can govern relations w/ Indians
b. Indian territory is separate from the state
3. Importance—limiting state powers-State laws have no force w/ respect to Indian tribes.
a.Modern law in this area

Front 15

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

Back 15

-Commerce Clause-->
a1. What does the word “commerce mean”?
---Commerce is commercial “intercourse” b/t nations and in parts of the nation
----Navigation is commerce
2. what does “among the several states mean?”
--Anything that interacts w/, impacts or affects commerce in another state
--Doesn’t effect purely internal commerce, meaning it has no effect whatsoever on other states.
3. what is the scope of the commerce power?
---No limitations, and may be exercised to its utmost extent
--Limitation = Political process
4. What is the relationship between Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and state power? 3 possible answers
--A. States can regulate interstate commerce along w/ the federal gov Rejected
--B. States have no power what-so-ever
--C. If Congress has acted any state law to the contrary Is preempted.
NOTE(Court doesn’t decide between 2 and 3  next case does this)

Front 16

What are the 2 rules from Gibbons v. Ogden

Back 16

Rules
a. Commerce includes navigation and can extend to intrastate activity that effects interstate commerce.
b.Pre-emption- If Congress has acted with respect to the issue , state laws to the contrary are preempted by the federal laws. (Supremacy Clause) Gov had imposed Federal Coasting Act.

Front 17

Wilson v. Blackbird Creek Marsh (1829)

Back 17

Dormant Commerce Clause:
a. In its “dormant state” the dam isn’t contrary to Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce
--State was acting under police powers

Front 18

What are the 2 rules from Gibbons v. Ogden

Back 18

Rules
a. Commerce includes navigation and can extend to intrastate activity that effects interstate commerce.
b.Pre-emption- If Congress has acted with respect to the issue , state laws to the contrary are preempted by the federal laws. (Supremacy Clause) Gov had imposed Federal Coasting Act.

Front 19

Summary of Marshall's Jurisprudence? (4)

Back 19

1. Broad reading of congressional power
a. Implied powers (McCulloch)
b. Commerce Power (Gibbons)
2. Corresponding Willingness to strike down state laws that interfere w/ federal power
a. MY tax on bank (McCulloch)
b. G.A. anti-Indian laws
c. NY monopoly on steam boats (Gibbons)
3. Broad reading of power of Supreme Court
a. Judicial review (Marbury)Federal legislation
b. Review of state court decisions --Martin and Cohens)
4. Reading of the K Clause and other provisions that benefit business and commerce
a. Fletcher- striking down repeal of land frants
b. Protecting corprate charters (Dartmouth)
c. Clearing up channels of interstate commerce (Gibbons)