Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
27 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What are the 2 major goals of the court from 1789-1810?
|
1. Long term Union preservation- Establishing supremacy of Federal government and cohesion of states.
2. Short term- Building a niche in american politics: No explicit role, court must carve out Judicial review |
|
|
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
|
come on, you know this one
|
|
|
Fletcher v. Peck (1810)
|
First time court struck down action of state legislature. Constitution restricts states.
|
|
|
What are the short and long term goals from 1810 to 1835?
|
1. Long term- Building a home: Hunter's Lessee - Court strikes down ruling of a state court, establishing supremacy of SC.
2. Short term- Union preservation: McCulloch v. Maryland: Reads powers of congress expansively |
|
|
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816)
|
First time court struck down state court ruling
|
|
|
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
|
States cannot obstruct a federal law. Congress given large leeway in commerce/necessary and proper.
|
|
|
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
|
First commerce clause case. Marshall offers expansive reading of commerce clause.
|
|
|
Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819)
|
Marshall upholds strong view of contract clause.
|
|
|
Mayor of NYC v. Miln (1837)
|
Ships coming in, no federal law on topic. Taney says states are exercising their police powers
|
|
|
Dredd Scott v. Sanford (1856)
|
1. Dredd scott is not a citizen, thus he has no standing.
2. Declared federal law banning slavery in territories unconstitutional. |
|
|
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837)
|
- Ambiguity in contracts resolved in favor of the public.
|
|
|
US v. EC Knight Co.
|
Strikes down part of Sherman Antitrust Act saying manufacturing does not equal commerce
|
|
|
Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918)
|
Court uses manufacturing/commerce distinction to strike down ban on interstate shipment of products produced via child labor.
|
|
|
NLRB v. Jones (1937)
|
Court says manufacturing can affect broader econ thus can be regulated
|
|
|
Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923)
|
Strikes down minimum wage law because it violates liberty of contract.
|
|
|
West Coast Hotel v. Parish (1937)
|
Minimum wage upheld, DPC (econ) dies.
|
|
|
US v. Carolene Products (1938)
|
Famous footnote 4, insular minorities. Econ regulation will be assumed to be constitutional
|
|
|
Wickard v. Filburn (1942)
|
You know this
|
|
|
Williamson v. Lee Optical (1953)
|
Court will no longer strike down econ legislation that may be unwise or arbitrary
|
|
|
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
|
Seperate but equal
|
|
|
Korematsu v. US (1944)
|
Court says all legislation towards racial groups are suspect. Origin of strict scrutiny for racial discrimination.
|
|
|
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
|
Seperate but equal struck down.
|
|
|
Gitlow v. NY (1925)
|
Free Speech applies against states through DPC
|
|
|
Adamson v. California (1947)
|
5th amendment does not apply against states
|
|
|
Baker v. Carr (1962)
|
Districting now justiciable. State has obligation to strive for one person = one vote
|
|
|
Katzenbach v. McClung (1964)
|
Any discrimination is intolerable
|
|
|
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
|
Penumbra of rights protected by first amendment. Creation of right to privacy.
|
