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;
35 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Judicial Review |
the power of federal courts to determine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions - assess the validity of other laws |
|
|
1. all federal courts can exercise JR 2. extends to acts of Congress, Executive, and state laws 3. It can be exercised in the Judicial Branch 4. Not mentioned in the Constitution (not explicitly) |
What is the jurisdiction of Judicial Review? |
|
|
Marbury v. Madision (1803) |
Which court case established Judicial Review? |
|
|
1. it is not explicitly stated in the Const. 2. JR can undermine majority rule 3. Unnecessary expansion of checks and balances; the other two political branches are capable of balancing or siding with one another's check powers |
What are the criticisms of Judicial Review? |
|
|
writ of mandamus |
an order from a court to an inferior government official ordering the government official to properly fulfill their official duties or correct an abuse of discretion |
|
|
Whether the Supreme Court was in the position to issue a writ of mandamus? |
What was the basis for Marbury v. Madison? |
|
|
1. Whether the Supreme Court may exercise Judicial Review with respect to state laws 2. Whether state may pass retroactive laws |
What was the basis for Fletcher v. Peck (1810)? |
|
|
- Unanimous decision - Yes. Supreme Court may exercise Judicial Review with respect to state laws - No. the State may NOT pass retroactive laws |
What was the ruling in Fletcher v. Peck? |
|
|
a law that changes a law that was legal at the particular time the law and/or action was committed |
ex post facto laws |
|
|
- Supreme court can exercise JR with state laws - States cannot pass ex post facto laws |
What was the significance of Fletcher v. Peck? |
|
|
it is the Supreme Court's duty to interpret the Constitution |
What did the Judicial Act of 1789 specify? |
|
|
1. Whether the Supreme Court could exercise Appellate Jurisdiction over state courts 2. Whether the national government is superior to the states 3. Supreme Court exercising Appellate Jurisdiction (Judicial Review) over state court decisions |
What was the issue(s) of Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816)? |
|
|
- The Treaty of London was the supreme law of the land under the National Supremacy Clause of Article 6 |
What was the Supreme Court's ruling in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee? |
|
|
- The state law at odds with a national treaty - state law and federal law (international treaties) are NOT co-equals |
What was the Significance of the ruling in Martin b. Hunter's Lessee? |
|
|
1. Whether U.S. Congress had the power to exercise an unenumerated power 2. Whether the state court could impose a tax on the federal government |
What was the issue(s) of McCullough v. MD (1819)? |
|
|
a doctrine that gives leeway to exercise powers that are not explicitly written in the Constitution |
Doctrine of implied powers |
|
|
1. Yes. Congress may enact a bank in pursuit to the necessary and proper clause for carry out the enumerate powers not listed in Article 1, Section 8 2. No, states may not impose taxes on the federal government |
What was the ruling of McCullough v. MD? |
|
|
Elastic Clause |
What is another term for the necessary and proper clause? |
|
|
diversity jurisdiction |
is a form of subject-matter jurisdiction in civil procedure in which aUnited States district court in the federal judiciary has the power to hear a civil case where the persons that are parties are "diverse" in citizenship, which generally indicates that they are citizens of different states or non-U.S. citizens. |
|
|
Whether federal courts can give precedence to federal common law over state common law when addressing a non-federal claim or state civil procedure? |
What the legal question in Swift v. Tyson (1842)? |
|
|
The Supreme court reversed the lower court decision - In state civil procedure, federal courts must honor state common law, unless federal law can regulate the case law in pursuit Constitution mandate |
What was the ruling in Swift v. Tyson (1842)? |
|
|
Under the PA common law, if a person was not free of being at fault in an accident (contributory negligence), that person would be required to pay of his/her damages - Under federal common law, if a person was partially negligent, then that person was entitled to receive some entitlements |
What was the issue in the Erie Railroad Company v. Tompkins? |
|
|
The Supreme Court ruled using the Federal common law: Which states that if a person was partially negligent, then that person was entitled to receive some entitlements |
What was the ruling in ERC v. Tompkins? |
|
|
The Supreme court overrule the precedence in ERC v. Tompkins - The law is to be applied in any case, is in the forum state known as the "Erie Doctrine" |
What was the significance of Swift v. Tyson? |
|
|
If the case involves a monetary value of greater than or equal to $75,000 |
When would a federal court hear a diversity claim? |
|
|
sovereign immunity |
doctrine that prevents the government form being sued without its consent - lawsuit against the government will not be applicable without a statute that approves "being sued" |
|
|
Federal Tort Claims Act (1946) |
this act authorized individuals to sue the federal government for claims except in special circumstances, passed by Congress, created courts to hear claims against the U.S. government |
|
|
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (1988) |
required states to negotiate and sign agreements with Indian Tribes to permit and regulate Indian gaming - if a state refused to enter into negotiation with Indian tribes, then the Indian tribe could sue the states that failed to negotiate or act in good faith |
|
|
Whether Congress had the Constitutional authority to make the IGRA act in the first place in pursuit to Article 1 Section 8? |
What was the question in fact in Seminole Tribe v. FL (1996)? |
|
|
Whether Congress can abrogate a states sovereign immunity in pursuit to Article 1, Section 8 Interstate commerce clause? |
What was the legal question in Seminole Tribe v. FL (1996)? |
|
|
Congress cannot use the commerce clause as a basis that removing a state's sovereign immunity through legislative actions |
What was the ruling in Seminole Tribe v. FL (1996)? |
|
|
Yes: the due process and the equal protection clause |
Yes or No. Does the 14th Amendment put limitations on the 11th Amendment sovereign immunity. |
|
|
Congress can abrogate a states sovereign immunity under the enforcement clause of the 14th Amendment, and not the interstate commerce clause of Article 1 Section 8 |
What was the significance of Seminole v. FL (1996)? |
|
|
Whether Congress could abrogate sovereign immunity in a state? |
What was the legal question in Alden v. Maine (1999)? |
|
|
Supreme Court ruled in the negative, that a state court could not be sued, and can remain its sovereign immunity under the 10th Amendment |
What was the ruling in Alden v. Maine (1999)? |
