Cases

Question 1

Goldwater v. Carter

Answer 1

SCOTUS declined in Goldwater v. Carter (1979) to decide whether the President had the power to rescind treaty obligations, effectively allowing the President to rescind a treaty (said issue was non-justiciable)

Question 2

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export

Answer 2

President is vested w/ all foreign affairs powers as an inherent attribute of sovereignty (not in Constitution –> vestige inherited from England)

Under this theory, the United States may exercise not only the powers that the Constitution expressly grants, but also other foreign affairs powers enjoyed by all sovereigns.

Question 3

United States v. Nixon

Answer 3

In order to claim presidential privilege, the claim must be based on military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets

The claim of executive privilege cannot be generalized interests →
Such a claim cannot be upheld in a criminal proceeding as the interests of justice outweigh Nixon’s general need for confidentiality.

Question 4

Nixon v. Fitzgerald

Answer 4

President has absolute immunity from civil liability for official acts taken while President.

Question 5

Clinton v. Jones

Answer 5

The President could be subject to civil suit while serving as President for private actions taken in his personal capacity prior to taking office.

Question 6

United States v. Cox

Answer 6

Facts: Ct didn’t interfere w/ exec decision for a CRIMINAL case in which US atty refused to issue certain indictments (bc they were racist)

Rule: The Court cannot influence or override the prosecutorial discretion of U.S. attorneys (prosecution = exec function)

Question 7

Clinton v. New York

Answer 7

Line Item Veto case → Pres signed a bill w/ blue pen but marked out the portions of the bill he didn’t approve of (or “vetoed”) with red pen

Rule: Legislation that passes through Congress must either be entirely approved or entirely rejected by the president. Therefore, the line item veto is unconstitutional.

President has no power to “repeal a statute” by declining to spend funds specifically appropriated by Congress when Congress has expressly mandated that they be spent, regardless of Congress’s reason for making the appropriation.

J. Scalia dissent → no difference between permitting a line-item veto and giving the President discretion to spend.

Question 8

Stuart v. Laird

Answer 8

Facts –> Congress repealed the Judiciary Act of 1801, eliminating the circuit courts and circuit judges that the 1801 act had established. Soon after the repeal, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1802, which authorized SCOTUS justices to sit on circuit courts. P filed a petition to overturn a judgment by a circuit court, arguing that the repeal of the 1801 act was unconstitutional

RULE: Congress has the constitutional authority to establish inferior tribunals and to transfer a cause between tribunals.

Question 9

Marbury v. Madison

Answer 9

Facts –> Marbury (P) sought a writ of mandamus to compel Madison (D) to deliver the commission and finalize P’s appointment. Congress had authorized SCOTUS to issue writs of mandamus as part of the Judiciary Act of 1789, so P brought his action under the Court’s OG jx

RULE: SCOTUS has the authority to review laws and legislative acts to determine whether they comply with the Constitution.

The Constitution only provides SCOTUS original jurisdiction over (1) cases between states and (2) cases involving ambassadors.
Cong can’t alter Const (i.e., add to Ct’s OG jx) by statute, only by amendment.

Even though Marbury has a right to the commission, the Ct doesn’t have OG jx over a case like this (needs to be an appeal)

Question 10

Cooper v. Aaron

Answer 10

(1958) First time the Supreme Court claimed judicial supremacy.

Holding: segregation in public schools violated the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th Amendment

Many schools throughout the south resisted this decision

Question 11

(Walter) Nixon v. United States

Answer 11

Walter Nixon = federal judge –> being sketchy and waiving a charge for his friend’s son (allegedly) in exchange for oil and gas royalties. Nixon sought a declaratory judgment that his impeachment conviction was void and that his judicial salary and privileges should be reinstated.

RULE: The constitutionality of Senate impeachment proceedings is a non-justiciable political question incapable of judicial adjudication –> Court refused to decide whether the Senate violated the Impeachment Clause

The Impeachment Clause names three specific requirements for impeachment and that authority is delegated to Congress

Question 12

Luther v. Borden

Answer 12

Facts –> Luther claimed that he was a rep of the legit Rhode Island gov’t and that charter gov’t had been replaced

RULE: Under the Guarantee Clause, the particular government established in a state is a question for Congress, not the courts.

Court refused to decide whether a state government is legitimate bc the Guarantee Clause, Art. IV, § 4, delegated the power to recognize a state government and guarantee a republican form of government in every state to Congress

Additionally, no manageable judicial standards

Question 13

Baker v. Carr test

Answer 13

1. Does the Constitutional text commit issue to another branch?
2. Is there a judicially discoverable and manageable standard for resolving issue?
3. Can the court decide the question without showing lack of respect for political branches?
4. Is there an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to political decision already made?
5. Is there potential for embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various branches on one question? (Courts only need one to declare a case unreviewable)

Question 14

Sheldon v. Sill

Answer 14

Facts –> Sill (P) was an assignee of a bond and mortgage from an MI citizen (Sill = NY citizen). Sill then sued Sheldon (D), a citizen of MI, to recover on the bond and mortgage. Sill brought the action in fed ct based on diversity jx. Sheldon argued that diversity jx did not apply, because diversity existed only as a result of an assignment of rights to Sill

RULE: Congress has the authority to limit the jurisdiction of lower federal courts (i.e., Judiciary Act), as long as the acts of Congress do not conflict with the United States Constitution.

Bc Cong has the power to limit jurisdiction, the Judiciary Act provision prohibiting assignee jurisdiction in cases where the assignor lacked jurisdiction does not conflict with the diversity provision of the U.S. Constitution.

Question 15

Chisholm v. Georgia

Answer 15

Facts –> citizen of SC (P) brought a CL suit against the State of Georgia (D) in SCOTUS. P sought to recover payment for goods that were sold to GA during the Revolutionary War. GA claimed sovereign immunity and failed to appear in court

RULE: A state can be liable in suit to a private individual.

The Diversity Clause abolished Georgia’s sovereign immunity between a state and a citizen of another state (South Carolina).

Chief Justice Jay and Justice Wilson believed that state sovereign immunity was incompatible with sovereignty of the people.

THIS WAS OVERTURNED BY THE 11TH AMENDMENT

Question 16

Hans v. Louisiana

Answer 16

Facts –> LA citizen sues the state of LA

RULE: A state may not be sued in federal court by one of its own citizens even if the cause of action arises under federal law.

11th Amendment granted states immunity from suits both by their own citizens and by citizens of other states.

SCOTUS has interpreted the Eleventh Amendment as barring unconsented private suits against a state or state agency for retroactive money damages.

Question 17

Ex parte Young

Answer 17

Facts –> MN enacted legislation regulating railroad rates → if a RR company charged rates in excess of the approved amount, its officers and employees were subject to misdemeanor or felony convictions, fines, and potentially lengthy jail sentences. The shareholders of multiple RR companies (Ps) brought suit in federal circuit court, alleging that the law violated the due process rights guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment

RULE: Private actions may be brought in federal court against state officials, even though states have sovereign immunity.

Plaintiffs may sue state officials by name, rather than by state.

Must name state official and sue either
-In official capacity for injunctive relief, or
-In their private capacity for money damages

Question 18

Ex parte McCardle

Answer 18

Facts –> McCardle sought appellate review of his habeas corpus petition in SCOTUS, relying on an 1867 congressional statute that permitted the SCOTUS to have appellate jurisdiction over such matters → but while the case was pending, Congress passed a new law repealing the part of the 1867 statute that permitted such review

RULE: Congress can withdraw jurisdiction from SCOTUS after jurisdiction has been given

Congress has complete power over the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction.

Question 19

DeFunis v. Odegaard

Answer 19

Facts –> P denied admission to law school allegedly bc of his race, but by the time the case was argued in front of SCOTUS, P was in his last semester of law school

Rule: case is moot when nothing concrete turned on resolving the Const issue

Question 20

Fairfield v. Hughes

Answer 20

RULE: no general standing for citizens as taxpayers

Note: “taxpayer” is a misnomer → TPs can sue regarding taxes, but can’t sue for what gov’t DOES with taxes

Question 21

Mass v. Mellon

Answer 21

RULE: rejects state standing to assert the injuries of taxpayers.

Question 22

McCulloch v. Maryland

Answer 22

Facts –> state of MD (P) passed a bill to tax the nat’l bank branch in MD; head of the branch (McCulloch) (D) refused to pay the tax

Holding: (1) Congress had the power to establish the national bank and (2) a state could not tax a national entity in a way that it does not tax a comparable state entity.

Necessary and Proper Clause
-Must be in the service of enumerated powers (means to an end)
-Cannot be prohibited by Const or under pretext of executing powers

Question 23

Gibbons v. Ogden

Answer 23

Facts –> dispute over exclusive rights to operate steamboat in NY waters

Cong’s power to regulate navigation on US water forbids NY from regulating such waters

RULE: If a state and Cong both pass conflicting laws regulating interstate commerce, the fed law governs pursuant to Cong’s Const grant of power to regulate interstate commerce.

-“Commerce” → commercial intercourse (broader than buying and selling)
-“Regulate” → prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed
-“Among the several states” → intermingling, does not include wholly intrastate commerce. Includes commerce that could be intrastate, but which has interstate effects

Question 24

Maine v. Taylor

Answer 24

Did not violate Dormant Commerce Clause despite prohibiting out of state bait fish imports

Upheld despite discrimination of out of state bait fish imports bc GENUINE IMPORTANT REASON of protecting natural resources from invasive species

Question 25

Champion v. Ames

Answer 25

RULE: Congress can prohibit the interstate transportation of lottery tickets

CHANNELS

Congress can regulate “channels” of interstate commerce even if for police power reason and even if no commercial transaction.

Power to regulate includes power to prohibit commerce of noxious goods
-Gambling = bad

Question 26

The Shreveport Rate Case

Answer 26

RULE: Congress may regulate operations in all matters having a close and substantial relation to interstate traffic, to the efficiency of interstate service, and to the maintenance of conditions under which interstate commerce may be conducted upon fair terms.

INSTRUMENTALITIES

CC authorizes incidental regulation of “instrumentalities/mediums of transportation” of intrastate commerce when they harm interstate commerce, even if wholly intrastate.

Question 27

Caminetti v. United States

Answer 27

RULE: Congress can regulate transporting of women across state lines for immoral purposes

CHANNELS

Congress can regulate channels (state line crossings) even if not commercial activity (buying/selling)

Question 28

Hammer v. Dagenhart

Answer 28

Facts –> dad sues on behalf of his sons to enjoin the enforcement of an act of Cong intended to prevent interstate commerce in products of child labor

RULE: Cong may note use its CC power to regulate child labor in the states as this is a purely local matter

THIS CASE GETS OVERRULED

Cong was trying to regulate the thing being transported, which is an overreach of power
Moving Bibles across state lines example

Question 29

NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel (1937)

Answer 29

RULE: Congress can regulate intrastate labor practices under the Nat’l Labor Relations Act (NLRA)

Turning point in narrow interpretation → this is the more expansive interpretation that’s existed ever since

Rejects direct/indirect effects test from Schechter Poultry and production/commerce distinction of Carter Coal → “hours and wages have no direct relation to interstate commerce” + “manufacturing has no direct relation to interstate commerce”

Congress can regulate “wholly intrastate” activities that have “close and substantial relation to interstate commerce”

Question 30

US v Darby

Answer 30

Facts –> US gov’t (P) sued lumber company (D) for engaging in substandard labor practices

RULE: Congress can prohibit shipment in interstate commerce of goods produced in violation of Fair Labor Standards Act.

Overruled Hammer

Congress can regulate intrastate activities which so affect interstate commerce that regulation is an appropriate means to a legitimate end (regulation of interstate commerce → Necessary and Proper Clause)

Question 31

Wickard v. Filburn

Answer 31

FACTS –> commercial farmer told he can only grow a certain amt of wheat during Great Depression

RULE: Congress can regulate production and consumption of homegrown wheat
Limits on CC Power

Aggregation Test → whether the class of activities as a whole substantially effects interstate commerce

“Homegrown” wheat is a market good

Extensive analysis of effect on wheat market

Gov’t provided extensive proof that the aggregated nonparticipation would have an economic impact

Rejects manufacturing/commerce distinction

Question 32

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US

Answer 32

RULE: Congress may enact regulations that prevent racially discriminatory policies in hotel accommodations because of the negative effects of those policies on interstate commerce.

Question 33

US v. Lopez

Answer 33

Facts –> gun free school zones act passed and student brought a gun to his HS; student challenged const of GFSZA as a regulation based on Cong’s CC power

RULE: Con may not, pursuant to its CC powers, pass a law that prohibits a gun nor a school

Reasoning:
1. Intrastate noneconomic activity
2. No jx element (don’t know that gun moved interstate)
3. No specific Cong findings regarding effect of gun possession in school zones
4. Link too attenuated

Ct ruling Cong’s power back in

Question 34

Gonzales v. Raich

Answer 34

Facts –> CA resident grew weed which was ok under CA law but conflicted w/ federal Controlled Substances Act

RULE: CC allows Cong to regulate activity within a state if the activity has a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce

New test → Rational basis review: lowest level of judicial scrutiny to examine laws (every law will survive rational basis review)
–>Unless it’s a crazy law

Question 35

US v. Comstock

Answer 35

Facts –> pedos challenged a civil commitment statute that allowed them to be detained beyond their sentence

RULE: Under N&P Clause, Cong has authority to enact a law that allows civil commitment on mentally ill, sexually dangerous, federal inmates beyond the end of prisoner’s criminal sentences.

Test: Does a law constitute a means that is rationally related to implementation of a constitutionally enumerated power?

Limiting principle:
N&P does not confer general police power on Cong
It is simply a means N&P to an end enum power

Remember the rationale: you can’t give cong too much power under CC to destroy distinction between state and fed gov that is inherent in federalism

Question 36

Printz v. US

Answer 36

Facts –> Brady act req’d sellers of firearms to report sales to their county Chief Law Enforcement Officers (CLEOs). The CLEOs would then conduct background checks and confirm the lawfulness of the sales. Printz and Mack (Ps) were CLEOs. P brought suit against US alleging that the Brady Act was an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional power because it compelled state officers to participate in federal service.

RULE: Congress cannot direct state officials in their official capacity because to hold otherwise
would grant Congress a general police power.

The Anti-Commandeering Rule applied to state executives.

Question 37

Testa v. Katt

Answer 37

RULE: Federal courts can tell state courts what to do; state courts are an exception to the
Anti-Commandeering Rule.

State courts are exceptions to anti-commandeering rule

Other exceptions: state militias, state election machinery, fed ct jx over states as parties, Full Faith & Credit Clause

Question 38

Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority

Answer 38

RULE: Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate the wages and hours of state employees under the Commerce Clause.

This regulation is not barred by 10th Amendment –> 10th Am doesn’t safeguard states bc that’s built in by federalism (voting)

The text of the 10th Am makes conclusion clear that it power applies to fed gov’t, 10th Am doesn’t apply

Question 39

NFIB v. Sebelius

Answer 39

Ct upheld the ACA under the taxing power, but determined it was unconstitutional under the spending, CC, and N&P powers

Question 40

US v. Butler

Answer 40

Facts –> Congress enacted the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) to allow the Secretary of Ag to set limits on the production of certain crops and tax farmers that produced in excess of those limits. The AAA also provided grants to farmers to control their production of crops and thus regulate prices. Butler (P), a processor of crops, brought suit against the US to challenge the constitutionality of the AAA.

RULE: Congress may not use its taxing and spending powers to obtain an unconstitutional result, such as invading the reserved rights of the states under the Tenth Amendment.

Congress’s power to tax and spend is a separate power not confined by Congress’s other enumerated powers. However, this power is not without limits. Any congressional power to tax and spend is limited by Tenth Amendment state sovereignty concerns. The AAA violates state sovereignty by seeking to invade states’ rights to regulate and control their own agricultural production.

Court held that the spending power should be interpreted broadly and only limited by the “local” restriction.

Question 41

South Dakota v. Dole

Answer 41

RULE: The receipt of federal funds may be conditional if the exercise of the spending power is for the general welfare, the conditions are unambiguous, the conditions are related to a federal interest in a particular national project or program, and the conditions do not violate any other constitutional provisions such as the Tenth Amendment.

4-part test:
1. Is the spending power exercised in pursuit of the general welfare?
2. Has Congress made the conditions for receipt of funds unambiguous?
3. Are the conditions rationally related to a federal interest, in particular national projects or programs?
4. Do other constitutional provisions provide an independent bar to the conditional grant of federal funds?

Question 42

Mistretta v. United States

Answer 42

(1989)

Holding: nondelegation doctrine does not prevent Congress from delegating rule-making authority to other branches so long as it gives “intelligible principles” to guide the exercise of the delegated authority

Scalia’s dissent → grants Congress power to create a “JV Congress”

Question 43

Gundy v United States

Answer 43

2019

Facts –> Congress delegated “the authority to specify the applicability” of the registration requirements to pre-act offenders to the United States attorney general (AG)

RULE: Under the intelligible principle rule, Congress authorizing the AG to enforce the National Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act against pre-act offenders does not violate the nondelegation doctrine.

Pretty much everything passes as an intelligible principle now

Question 44

West Virginia v. EPA

Answer 44

SCOTUS held EPA lacks authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions

Major questions doctrine –> States that “unless Congress clearly says so, a statute will not be read to delegate especially vast power to an administrative agency.”

Question 45

Zivtovsky v. Kerry

Answer 45

Facts –> P was born to US citizens living in Jerusalem and his parents wanted to put his place of birth on his US passport as Jerusalem, Israel → employees said they couldn’t bc of State Dept Policy

RULE: Pres has exclusive power to recognize foreign nations and governments

Exclusive recognition power: formal acknowledgment of an effective gov’t for a territory (here → scared to recognize a particular country’s sovereignty over Jerusalem)

Policy is part of specific executive power—“receive Ambassadors”—and thus, cannot be regulated by Congress. Art. II, § 3

J. Thomas concurrence
Policy on Jerusalem is part of unenumerated “executive power,” per the Vesting Clause, and cannot be regulated by Congress.
Congress lacks this enumerated power, and thus, the President has the power.

3 ways to hold a statute unconstitutional
-Part of an enumerated exec power that Cong can’t regulate
-Policy is part of specific exec power such as power to receive ambassadors
-Cong lacks any enumerated power on the subject

Question 46

Trump v Mazars

Answer 46

Facts –> HoR issued subpoenas requesting info about Trump and his fam

Rule: HoR has power to subpoena a president’s records if it’s related to and in furtherance of a legislative function and meets necessary requirements regarding detail.

Established 4-factor test
1) Does the asserted legis purpose warrant the significance step of involving the Pres and his papers?
2) Is subpoena broader than reasonably necessary to support he legis objective?
3) Does the nature of the evidence establish that a subpoena advances a valid legis purpose?
4) How severe of a burden does the subpoena place on the Pres?

Here –> lack of specificity creates too high a risk of an overly broad subpoena, which puts an undue burden on the president (judgment vacated)

Question 47

United States v. Lovett

Answer 47

Facts –> Ps were named in a bill that stated no salary would be paid to Ps bc of suspected communist affiliations

Rule: Cong can’t use its appropriations power to permanently prohibit federal funds from being used to compensate specific individuals for their government service, without judicial review (needs trial).

The act in question here qualified as a bill of attainder bc it applied to (1) easily ascertainable members and (2) forbid gov’t employment for life (prohibition on ever holding a government job constitutes “punishment”)

How did the Court have the power to order back-pay to Ps? –> Since the bill was found unconstitutional, the situation reverts back to the status quo, thus, the Court could order back-pay for their wrongfully withheld salaries since the salaries had already been appropriated.

Question 48

HoR v. Burwell

Answer 48

Rule: Only Congress has the power to appropriate funds, thus, the President may not delay or alter percentages of appropriated funds.

The House has standing to sue the executive branch when the executive branch misappropriates funds, but not when the executive branch violates a statute.

Question 49

Calder v. Bull

Answer 49

RULE: Prohibition against ex post facto laws only applies to criminal proceedings; retroactive civil laws are constitutional.

Question 50

Buckley v. Valeo

Answer 50

RULE: vesting power in the legislature by requiring nominations for officers exercising “significant authority” (a/k/a not inferior officers) from the Pres and both Houses is unconstitutional

Question 51

Humphrey’s Executor v. United States

Answer 51

Facts –> FTC commissioner was nominated for 7 yr term but was removed and his compensation was denied → his estate sued for back pay

Rule: Congress can limit the President’s removal power by creating independent agencies and proscribing conditions for removal.

FTC Act’s enumerated reasons for removal: “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office” → Pres needed to follow statutory provision for removal

Members of administrative agencies demonstrate quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative roles, so they are not purely executive officers.

Limits Myers, but only applies to independent agencies that Cong created → a/k/a agencies that don’t exercise predominantly executive functions
“Oddball decision”

Wallace said Ct got it wrong bc it essentially created a 4th branch of gov’t

Question 52

The Prize Cases

Answer 52

Facts –> Pres Lincoln instituted naval blockade of the southern states during Civil War

Although war was not declared, the President was deemed to be reacting to open rebellion, and thus, acting within the President’s defensive powers.
(Defensive Powers: hostage rescue, covert operations, police actions)

Rule: President has defensive war power to conduct military command during hostilities or under national threat.

President may initiate offensive military action in the national interest

Takeaway → Lincoln’s actions were authorized w/o war declaration bc Exec doesn’t need Cong’s auth bc he’s acting out of his own power (defense)

Question 53

Boumediene v. Bush

Answer 53

RULE: non-citizen enemy combatants captured and held abroad by military forces,where there is a “significant American presence,” have a constitutional right to habeas corpus.