Constitutional Law

Front 1

Concurrent Theory

Back 1

The powers that both the federal and state governmnets share

Front 2

Dormant Theory

Back 2

mere grant of commercial power to congress ousts the states. (states have no power whatsoever because the commerce clause says so)

Front 3

Mutual Exclusiveness Theory

Back 3

there are some exclusive rights to the federal and some to the states, but they are fixed. Neither can interfere with the powers of the other.

Front 4

Selective Exclusiveness

Back 4

the notion that on a case-by-case basis the supreme court would decide what was national in scope and what was local in scope. if it is national it is the federal gov. if it is local it is the state gov.

Front 5

Gibbons v. Ogden

Back 5

The first time the court decifered the commerce clause

Front 6

Marshall's definition of commerce in Gibbon's v. Ogden

Back 6

Commerce is intercourse, it is a unit, it is the making, the buying and selling, and the transportation of goods among the several states.

Front 7

Definition of Commerce as laid out in the Constitution & what article is it?

Back 7

Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce among foreign nations, among the several states, and with Indian tribes.
Article 1 S8 C3

Front 8

10th Amendment

Back 8

the powers not delegated to the U.S. by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people.

Front 9

U.S. v. E.C. Knight Co

Back 9

Limited the government's power to control monopolies. It esstablished the Direct v. Indirect test which is also the manufacturing v. distribution test.
manufacturing preceeds commerce

Front 10

Champion v. Ames

Back 10

1st time the court recognized that the federal government has a form of police power. Lotto was evil

Front 11

16th Amendment

Back 11

Federal Income Tax was upheld

Front 12

17th Amendment

Back 12

Senators are to be elected by the people

Front 13

18th Amendment

Back 13

Concurrent Powers of Federal and State governments

Front 14

20th Amendment

Back 14

Lame Duct term, the gap was closed.

Front 15

21st Amendment

Back 15

repealed prohibition

Front 16

South Carolina Highway Dept v. Bornwell Brothers

Back 16

South Carolina did not violate the commerce clause because the local highways were paid for and maintained by the state

Front 17

Direct v. Indirect (Manufacturing v. Distribution) Test

Back 17

Established in E.C. Knight. Direct would go to the federal government and indirect would go to the state government.

Front 18

Substantial Effect Test

Back 18

If intrastate activity has a substantial affect on interstate commerce the federal government can regulate, if not it belongs to the state. (Shreveport Case)

Front 19

Stream of Commerce Test

Back 19

(Swift co. v. U.S.)
if goods are just passing through a state going to another then that is the jurisdiction of the federal government. If they land in a state permanently then it is under the jurisdiction of the state.

Front 20

Theory behind the validity of tests

Back 20

at the end of the day tests do not decide the cases, the court does. They can interpret the tests in any way that fits there agenda.

Front 21

U.S. v. Darby

Back 21

Overturned Hammer v. Dagenhart. Federal government can regulate child labor. and this case outlawed child labor.
Fair Labor Standards Act

Front 22

Fair Labor Standards Act 1938

Back 22

established minimum wage, maximum hours, child labor restrictions.

Front 23

Cooley v. Board of Wardens

Back 23

Struck down the Dormant theory and upheld Selective Exclusiveness. States an regulate when the federal government is silent.

Front 24

Southern Pacific Company v. State of Arizona

Back 24

states could not control railroads as they extended into other states.

Front 25

National Leauge of Cities v. Usery

Back 25

Violated the traditional state function test.

Front 26

Traditional State Function Test

Back 26

COME BACK TO

Front 27

Garcia v. SanAntonio

Back 27

Overturned National Leauge of Cities. It is too hard to determine what a "traditional state function" is.

Front 28

Hammer v. Dagenhart

Back 28

- The power to regulate does not include the power to standardize or prohibit.
- Congress could not regulate Child Labor Laws because manufacturing as stated in EC Knight is not commerce.
- Goods had to be "harmful" for the federal government to be able to regulate it.

Front 29

National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co.

Back 29

- Does congress have the power to regulate labor relations?
- The gov can regulate labor relations. (Schecter just said they couldnt)
- Although actions might be intrastate in character when separatly considered if they have a substantial relation to interstate commerce then congress has the power to control it

Front 30

National Labor Relations Act 1935

Back 30

allowed for unions and collective bargaining (choosing their own representatives) Established the National Labor Relations Board

Front 31

New York v. United States

Back 31

- The take-title provision was unconstitutional.
- Accountability. the fed didnt want to be responsible so they pushed it off to the states

Front 32

Printz v. United States

Back 32

CALL KING

Front 33

U.S. Term Limits Inc. v. Thorton

Back 33

- Can states alter/add the qualifications for the U.S. Congress that are outlined in Article 1?
- No, the states cannot impose qualifications for prospective members of congress that are stricter than those specified in the constitution.
- This decision invalidated the congressional term limit of 23 states.

Front 34

Why do we use tests?

Back 34

So that all cases are judged based on the same criteria (equal priciples)
- they are judicial creations that dont come from the constitution- they do this so they can change them, redo them, or even disregard them.

Front 35

U.S. v. Butler

Back 35

- 1st Time the court interprets the general welfare clause
- congress can not regulate production (producers v. processors)
- violated the 10th amendment because it invaded a reserved power to the state (production belonged to the state)

Front 36

General Welfare Clause

Back 36

"to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts & excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the U.S"

Front 37

Mechanistic Theory of Jurisprudence

Back 37

simple task. look at the constitution & put policy next to it and it shouls appear to match

u.s. v. butler

Front 38

Test:

Back 38

The criteria a policy must meet to be constitutionaly permissible: must serve a purpose

Front 39

Rational Relations Test

Back 39

legitimate purpose for this policy ex: drinking age is 21 because of "traffic safety reasons"- based on evidence

Front 40

Burden of Proof test

Back 40

who must convince the courts that they have the power to do whatever - guidance for lawyers, judges, and litigants

Front 41

U.S. v. Morrison

Back 41

- Violence against women is not an economic activity --> can no longer pile inference upon inference like in Lopez-
- congress overstepped its bounds when they wanted to use the commerce clause and 15th amendment to regualate violence against women.
- Court rejects the argument that Congress can regulate noneconomic, violent criminal conduct based solely on that conduct's aggregate effect on interstate commerce.

Front 42

En Banc

Back 42

all the justices near the case @ circut court level (usually only 3 hear it)

Front 43

Certiorari

Back 43

higher court wants to hear a lower court's case if a) the lower court is divided or b) the lower court has heard this kind of court but the supreme court hasnt

Front 44

Substantial Affects Test

Back 44

in the past the court has deffered to congress and now they are reversing it. (they are now only using the test in name)

Front 45

Judicial Activism

Back 45

when elected officials deralict their elected duties the courts move in