Constitutional Law Flashcards
Federal judicial power comes from. . .
Article III of the Constitution
What are the limits of federal judicial power?
Federal judicial power extends to cases involving:
1) INTERPRETATION of the C, federal laws, treaties, and admiralty, and maritime laws; and
2) DISPUTES between states, states and foreign citizens, and citizens of diverse citizenship
Advisory opinions are those that lack. . .
a) An actual dispute between adverse parties, or
b) Any legally binding effect on the parties
NOT JUSTICIABLE
Justiciability
Whether a lawsuit is capable of judicial resolution as a case or controversy depends on:
a) WHAT it requests (NO ADVISORY OPINIONS),
b) WHEN it is brought [(ripe and not moot)], and
c) WHO brings it (someone with standing)
Article III judges have tenure for. . .
Life
Where does the Sup. Ct. have ORIGINAL JURISDICTION?
In all cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers, consuls, and those in which the state is a party, but Congress has given concurrent jurisdiction to lower federal courts in all cases EXCEPT those between states
Where does the Sup. Ct. have APPELLATE JURISDICTION?
In all cases to which federal power extends, subject to congressional exceptions and regulation
How do cases reach the Sup. Ct.? (2)
1) Writ of Certiorari
2) Appeal (rare cases)
Writ of Certiorari
One of two ways to get a case to the Sup. Ct.
The Sup. Ct. has complete DISCRETION to hear cases that come to it by certiorari
Those cases are:
1) Cases from STATE COURTS where (i) the constitutionality of a federal statute, federal treaty, or state statute is in issue, or (ii) a state statute allegedly violates federal law [looks like diversity jurisdiction from civ. pro.]
2) All cases from FEDERAL COURTS of appeals
Most cases brought this way
Appeal
One of two ways to get a case to the Sup. Ct.
The Sup. Ct. MUST hear cases that come to it by appeal
These cases are confined to decisions by THREE-judge federal district court panels that grant or deny INJUNCTIVE relief
Rare cases
What cases can come to the Sup. Ct. on appeal?
Cases that were decided by a 3-JUDGE federal district court panel that grant or deny INJUNCTIVE relief
What does it mean for a case to be “justiciable?”
That a federal court may address it
What cases are justiciable?
Those with a “case or controversy” may be addressed by federal court, subject to other limitations
Limitations on Federal Court Jurisdiction (4)
1) No advisory opinions
2) Ripeness
3) Mootness
4) Standing
When can federal courts hear actions for DECLARATORY relief?
There must be:
(i) an actual dispute between parties having adverse legal interests
(ii) complainants must show they have engaged (or wish to engage) in specific conduct, and
(iii) that challenged action poses a REAL AND IMMEDIATE DANGER to their interests
Requirement of specific PRESENT HARM or threat of specific future harm
Will federal courts determine the constitutionality of a statute that hasn’t been enforced yet and probably won’t be?
No, federal courts will NOT determine the constitutionality of a statute if it has NEVER been enforced and there is no REAL fear that is ever will be
Ripeness - Generally
Refers to the readiness of a case for litigation
“A claim is not ripe for adjudication if it rests upon contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all.”
Ripeness issues most usually arise when a plaintiff seeks anticipatory relief, such as an INJUNCTION
What is the goal of ripeness?
The goal is to prevent premature adjudication
If a dispute is insufficiently developed, any potential injury or stake is too speculative to warrant judicial action
How do federal courts determine ripeness?
A federal court will consider TWO main factors
(i) the FITNESS of the issues for judicial decision, and
(ii) the HARDSHIP to the parties withholding court consideration
Fitness for Judicial Decision
One of two factors considered for determining ripeness
Generally, an issue is not fit for judicial decision if it relies on UNCERTAIN OR CONTINGENT FUTURE EVENTS that may not occur as anticipated
Hardship to Parties
One of two factors considered for determining ripeness
A court will find that an action is ripe for review if a party would have to RISK SUBSTANTIAL HARDSHIP to provoke ENFORCEMENT of law
Mootness Requirement
A real controversy must exist at ALL stages of review
If the matter has already been resolved, case dismissed as moot
Exception - controversies capable of repetition, but evading review, are not moot
Examples: Issues concerning events of a short duration (e.g.: abortion) or D who voluntarily stops the offending practice but is free to resume
Exception to the Mootness Requirement
Some disputes or injuries may arise in the short-term and have the potential for recurrence, but always fail to last long enough to permit federal judicial review
In other words, controversies capable of repetition, but evading review, are NOT moot
Examples: Issues concerning events of a short duration (e.g.: abortion) or D who voluntarily stops the offending practice but is free to resume
Examples of Exceptions to the Mootness Requirement
a) Conduct Capable of Repetition, Yet Evading Review [in CMR]
b) Possibility of Collateral Legal Consequences
c) Voluntary Cessation [in CMR]
d) Class Action Litigation (w/ limitations)
What is voluntary cessation? What are its effects?
This is an exception to mootness
When a defendant VOLUNTARILY TERMINATES the allegedly unlawful conduct AFTER the lawsuit has been filed but RETAINS THE POWER TO RESUME the practice at any time
A federal court may deem the case NONMOOT
What does “conduct capable of repetition, yet evading review” mean? Give an example.
It is an exception to mootness
Some disputes or injuries may arise in the short-term and have the POTENTIAL for recurrence, but ALWAYS FAIL to last LONG ENOUGH to permit federal judicial review.
A classic example is the landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade
Court has held that this exception applies only in “exceptional situations,” where the plaintiff “can make a reasonable showing that he will again be subjected to the alleged illegality” (e.g.: a woman can get pregnant again)
How do class action lawsuits relate to mootness?
They CAN be an exception to mootness
Class rep. may continue to pursue a class action AFTER the rep.’s controversy has become moot IF claims of OTHER class members are still viable
Ripeness v. Mootness - Timing
Ripeness bars consideration of claims BEFORE they have been developed
Mootness bars their consideration AFTER they have been resolved
Standing - Generally
A person must have a CONCRETE STAKE in the outcome of a case at ALL stages of litigation, including appeal
Standing - Components (3)
1) Injury in Fact
2) Causation
3) Redressability
Injury in Fact
Requires both:
(i) a PARTICULARIZED injury - an injury that affects P in a personal and INDIVIDUAL WAY; and
(ii) a CONCRETE injury - one that exists in fact
Injury DOES NOT have to be economic
Not enough to merely show federal statute or constitutional provision violated
What does standing do?
Standing just allows P to GET INTO COURT
Successful ruling on standing issue ≠ P winning the suit, just means P gets an OPPORTUNITY to try it
What does a successful ruling on standing mean?
Successful ruling on standing issue ≠ P winning the suit, just means P gets an OPPORTUNITY to try it
Common Standing Issues (6)
1) Congressional Conferral of Standing
2) Standing to Enforce Govt. Statutes
3) Standing to Assert Rights of Others
4) Standings of Organizations
5) No Citizenship Standing
6) Taxpayer Standing Requisites
Congressional Conferral of Standing
One of six common standing issues
Congress has NO power to eliminate the case or controversy REQUIREMENT, ∴ CANNOT grant standing to someone WITHOUT INJURY
Note - a federal statute may create new interests, injury to which MAY be sufficient for standing
Standing to Enforce Govt. Statutes
One of six common standing issues
P may have standing to enforce a FEDERAL statute IF she is WITHIN THE [“ZONE OF INTERESTS”] Congress meant to protect
Zone of Interest
The type of interests or concerns that a law is intended to regulate or protect.
The law can be a constitutional provision or legislative statute.
To have standing when challenging state action based on a law, the plaintiff’s injury must fall under the zone of interests protected by that law (standing to enforce govt. statutes)
Standing to Assert the Rights of Others
One of six common standing issues
Generally, one CANNOT assert the constitutional rights of others to obtain standing
BUT a CLAIMANT WITH STANDING in her own right may ALSO assert the rights of a third party IF:
a) it is DIFFICULT for the third party to assert her own rights
(e. g.: an association may attack a law requiring disclosure of membership lists, because members cannot attack the law without disclosing their identities); OR
b) a SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP exists between the claimant and the third party
(e. g.: a doctor can assert a patient’s rights in challenging an abortion restriction)
Standing of Organizations
One of six common standing issues
An organization has standing IF
(i) there is an INJURY IN FACT to members that gives them a right to SUE ON THEIR OWN BEHALF,
(ii) the injury is RELATED to the organization’s PURPOSE, AND
(iii) INDIVIDUAL member PARTICIPATION in the lawsuit is NOT REQUIRED
No Citizenship Standing
One of six common standing issues
People have NO standing merely as “citizens” to claim govt. action violates federal law of the C
Compare -
Person MAY have standing to allege that federal action violates the 10TH AMENDMENT by interfering with powers reserved to the states, AS LONG AS the person has a REDRESSABLE INJURY IN FACT
10th Amendment - Generally
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
14th Amendment - Generally & Clauses
Granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States—including former slaves—and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws” (applies to federal govt. AND STATES)
Citizenship Clause -
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”
Equal Protection Clause -
“[n]or deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” - intended to stop state govt.s from discriminating against black Americans
Due Process Clause -
Expanded the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to apply to the states as well as the federal government, “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law”
Privileges and Immunities Clause -
“[t]he citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States”
Additionally. . .
1) Authorized the federal government to punish states that violated or abridged their citizens’ right to vote by proportionally reducing the states’ representation in Congress
2) Mandated that anyone who “engaged in insurrection” against the United States could not hold civil, military or elected office (without the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate)
“Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article” - similar to Enforcement Clause in the 13th Amendment
Citizenship Clause
First sentence of the 14th Amendment to the US C
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Saenz v. Roe - protects an aspect of the right to travel
Dredd Scott Case - reversed
Equal Protection Clause
14th Amendment to US C
“[n]or deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”
Extended Bill of Rights to states
Intended to stop state govt.s from discriminating against black Americans (applies to other races, nationalities, etc.)
Allows—but does NOT require—a state to provide equal educational funding to all students within the state
Due Process Clause - 14th Amendment
14th Amendment to US C
Expanded the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to apply to the states as well as the federal government, “nor shall any [STATE] deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law”
Due Process Clause - 5th Amendment
5th Amendment to US C
Includes a due process clause stating that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
The Fifth Amendment’s due process clause applies to the federal government
Two main protections:
1) PROCEDURAL due process - which requires government officials to follow fair procedures before depriving a person of life, liberty, or property; and
2) SUBSTANTIVE due process - which protects certain fundamental rights from government interference
Contains a prohibition against vague laws
Implied equal protection requirement similar to the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause
5th Amendment v. 14th Amendment - Due Process Clause
The Fifth Amendment’s due process clause applies to the federal government, while the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause applies to state governments
Privileges and Immunities Clause
14th Amendment to US C
Affects only rights of U.S. citizenship, i.e. rights which “owe their existence to the Federal government, its National character, its Constitution, or its laws”
Protects ONLY those rights guaranteed by the United States, NOT individual states
“[t]he citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States”
Interpreted to convey limited protection pertinent to a small minority of rights, such as the right to seek federal office
Slaughter-House Cases
83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 36 (1873)
Rule: U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ONLY protects the legal rights that are associated with FEDERAL citizenship, NOT those that pertain to STATE citizenship
Holding: Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not forbid Louisiana’s use of its police powers to regulate butchers
Procedural Due Process
One of two main protections:
Requires government officials to follow fair procedures before depriving a person of life, liberty, or property
Protects individuals from the coercive power of government by ensuring that adjudication processes, under valid laws, are fair and impartial
Examples of Protections:
(i) Required to include sufficient and timely notice on why a party is required to appear before a court or other administrative body;
(ii) The right to an impartial trier of fact and trier of law; and
(iii) The right to give testimony and present relevant evidence at hearings
Substantive Due Process
One of two main protections:
Protects certain fundamental rights from government interference
3 Types of Fundamental Rights:
1) Rights enumerated in and derived from the first eight amendments to the Constitution;
2) The right to participate in the political process, such as the rights of voting, association, and free speech
3) The rights of “discrete and insular minorities”
Ct. looks to see if right “deeply rooted in American tradition”
If the right is NOT a fundamental right, the court applies a RATIONAL BASIS test: if the violation of the right can be [rationally related to a legitimate government purpose,] the law is then held valid.
If the court establishes that the right being violated IS a fundamental right, it applies STRICT SCRUTINY and asks whether the law is [necessary to achieve a compelling state interest and whether the law is narrowly tailored to address that interest.]
Taxpayer Standing Requisites
One of six common standing issues
General Rule:
Taxpayer HAS STANDING to litigate her TAX BILL, but generally has NO standing to CHALLENGE GOVT. EXPENDITURES (interest too remote)
Taxpayer has NO standing to challenge TAX CREDITS
Requires the involvement CONGRESS’S SPENDING POWER (i.e.: no standing to challenge fed. govt. grants of surplus property to religious groups or expenditures of general executive branch funds)
Exception to General Rule -
Suits attacking CONGRESSIONAL spending measures on 1st Amendment ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE grounds (e.g.: congressionally approved federal expenditures to aid parochial schools)
Establishment Clause
1st Amendment
Prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion”
Not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another
It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion
Supreme Court has permitted religious invocations to:
(i) Open legislative session;
(ii) Public funds to be used for private religious school bussing and textbooks; and
(iii) University funds to be used to print and public student religious groups’ publications
Supreme Court has ruled AGAINST:
(i) Some overtly religious displays at courthouses;
(ii) State funding supplementing teacher salaries at religious schools; and
(iii) Some overly religious holiday decorations on public land
Government Action Implicating Religion - Supreme Court Rulings
Supreme Court has permitted religious invocations to:
(i) Open legislative session;
(ii) Public funds to be used for private religious school busing and textbooks; and
(iii) University funds to be used to print and public student religious groups’ publications
Supreme Court has ruled AGAINST:
(i) Some overtly religious displays at courthouses;
(ii) State funding supplementing teacher salaries at religious schools; and
(iii) Some overly religious holiday decorations on public land
What is the exception to the taxpayer standing requisites?
Taxpayer HAS STANDING in suits attacking CONGRESSIONAL spending measures on 1st Amendment ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE grounds (e.g.: congressionally approved federal expenditures to aid parochial (church-related) schools)
General Rule:
Taxpayer HAS STANDING to litigate her TAX BILL, but generally has NO standing to CHALLENGE GOVT. EXPENDITURES (interest too remote)
Taxpayer has NO standing to challenge TAX CREDITS
Adequate and Independent State Grounds
Sup. Ct. will NOT exercise jurisdiction if the state ct. judgment is based on ADEQUATE AND INDEPENDENT grounds - even if there are fed. issues involved
Adequate = FULLY DISPOSITIVE of the case Independent = decision NOT based on federal case INTERPRETATIONS of IDENTICAL federal provisions
When state ct. ≠ clearly indicate decision rests on state law, Sup. Ct. may hear the case
What does it mean for a case to be ‘adequate?’ Why does it matter?
Adequate = FULLY DISPOSITIVE of the case
Sup. Ct. will NOT exercise jurisdiction if the state ct. judgment is based on ADEQUATE AND INDEPENDENT grounds - even if there are fed. issues involved
What does it mean for a case to ‘independent?’ Why does it matter?
Independent = decision NOT based on federal case INTERPRETATIONS of IDENTICAL federal provisions
Sup. Ct. will NOT exercise jurisdiction if the state ct. judgment is based on ADEQUATE AND INDEPENDENT grounds - even if there are fed. issues involved
What are the 2 scenarios where there will be ABSTENTION by a federal court?
a) Unsettled Question of State Law
b) Pending State Proceedings
Unsettled Question of State Law
Fed. ct. will TEMPORARILY abstain from resolving a constitutional law claim when the disposition rests on an UNSETTLED QUESTION OF STATE LAW
Pending State Proceedings
Fed. ct.s will NOT enjoin pending state CRIMINAL proceedings (and in some cases pending state administrative or civil proceedings involving an important state interest)
EXCEPT when there is PROVEN HARASSMENT or prosecutions taken in BAD FAITH
Political Questions
Political questions will NOT be decided
Political issues are those:
(i) constitutionally committed to another branch of govt.; or
(ii) inherently incapable of judicial resolution
Called Political Question Doctrine, Justiciability Doctrine, or Unjusticiability Doctrine
Oetjen v. Central Leather Co. (1918) -
Ct. found that the conduct of foreign relations is the sole responsibility of the Executive Branch
∴ found that cases which challenge the way in which the Executive uses that power present political questions
∴ it cannot preside over these issues.
Examples of Political Questions (4)
1) Challenges based on the “Republican Form of Govt.” Clause of Article IV;
2) Challenges to congressional procedures for ratifying constitutional amendments;
3) The President’s conduct of foreign policy; and
4) Partisan legislative apportionment (gerrymandering)
are political questions
Nonpolitical Questions (2)
1) Arbitrary exclusion of a congressional delegate; and
2) Production of presidential papers and communications
are NOT political questions
11th Amendment - Limits on Federal Courts
Prohibits FEDERAL courts from hearing a private party’s or foreign govt.’s claims against a state govt.
Actions when a state is named a party or state will have to pay retroactive damages are BARRED
Actions against a state govt. in state ct. are BARRED (even on federal claims), unless the D state CONSENTS
(Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity)
∴ does NOT extend to:
1) Actions against LOCAL govt.s;
2) Actions by the UNITED STATES or other STATES; or
3) Proceedings in federal BANKRUPTCY ct.s
There are EXCEPTIONS
Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity
A judicial doctrine that PREVENTS THE GOVT. or its political subdivisions, departments, and agencies FROM BEING SUED WITHOUT its CONSENT
11th Amendment - Exceptions (2)
1) Certain Actions Against State Officers
2) Congress Removes the Immunity
11th Amendment - Certain Actions Against State Officers
One of two exceptions to the 11th Amendment prohibitions
These actions can be brought against STATE OFFICERS in federal court despite the 11th Amendment:
(i) Actions to ENJOIN an officer from FUTURE conduct that VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION or federal law, EVEN if this will require prospective PAYMENT from the state; and
(ii) Actions for DAMAGE again an officer PERSONALLY
11th Amendment - Congress Removes the Immunity
One of two exceptions to the 11th Amendment prohibitions
Congress can REMOVE 11th Amendment immunity as to ACTIONS CREATED UNDER THE 14TH AMENDMENT, but it must be UNMISTAKABLY clear that Congress intended to remove the immunity
Every exercise of federal power must be traced to the. . .
Constitution
Enumerated and Implied Powers
Congress can exercise powers ENUMERATED in the C, plus all auxiliary powers NECESSARY AND PROPER to carry out all powers vested in the fed. govt.
Necessary and Proper “Power”
Congress has the power to make all laws necessary and proper (appropriate) for executing ANY power granted to ANY branch of the fed. govt.
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Necessary and Proper Clause
Enables Congress to make the laws required for the exercise of its other powers established by the Constitution
Also called the “Elastic Clause”
Standing alone ≠ support fed. law
Must work in CONJUNCTION with another FEDERAL POWER
(Answer choice that says law is supported by N&P Clause (or is valid under Congress’s power to enact legislation n&p) will be INCORRECT, UNLESS another fed. power is linked to it in that Q)
What is the “Elastic Clause?”
Another term for the Necessary and Proper Clause
Taxing Power
Congress has power to tax, and most taxes will be upheld if they bear some REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP TO REVENUE PRODUCTION or if Congress has the POWER TO REGULATE the activity taxed
Whether something is a TAX as opposed to a REGULATION depends on its FUNCTION, rather than on a label given by Congress
(Function - i.e.: Does it seek to bring money into federal coffers?)
16th Amendment
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Spending Power
Congress may spend to “provide for the common defense and general welfare” - General Welfare Clause
Spending can be for ANY PUBLIC PURPOSE (still limited by BoR)
Enumerated/Implied Powers
What type of regulations CANNOT be supported by the General Welfare Clause?
Nonspending regulations
The fed. govt. can tax and SPEND for the general welfare; it CANNOT directly legislate it
∴ NONSPENDING regulations CANNOT be supported by the General Welfare Clause
Commerce Power
Congress has power to regulate ALL foreign and interstate commerce
To be within Congress’s power under the [Commerce Clause], a fed. law regulating interstate commerce must:
(i) REGULATE THE CHANNELS of interstate commerce;
(ii) REGULATE THE INSTRUMENTALITIES of interstate commerce and persons and things in interstate commerce; or
(iii) REGULATE ACTIVITIES THAT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT on interstate commerce
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Commerce Clause - Intrastate Activity
When Congress attempts to regulate INTRASTATE activity under the third prong of the Commerce Clause (activities that have a substantial effect), the ct. will UPHOLD the regulation IF:
1) It is of ECONOMIC OR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY (e.g.: growing wheat or medicinal marijuana even for personal consumption)
AND
2) The ct. can conceive of a RATIONAL BASIS on which Congress could conclude that the activity IN AGGREGATE substantially effects interstate commerce
If NONCOMMERCIAL and NONECONOMIC (e.g.: possessing gum in a school zone or gender-motivated violence), ct. will generally NOT aggregate the effects and the regulation will be upheld ONLY if Congress can show a DIRECT SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC EFFECT on interstate commerce (usually not able to do)
Commerce Clause - Activity v. Inactivity
Commerce Clause gives Congress power ONLY to regulate EXISTING commercial activity
Congress CANNOT COMPEL activity
War and Related Powers
C gives Congress power to DECLARE WAR, raise and support ARMIES, and provide and maintain a NAVY
Related powers:
1) Economic Regulation
2) Military Courts and Tribunals
Enumerated/Implied Powers
War-Related Powers - Economic Regulation
Economic regulation during war and in the postwar period to REMEDY wartime disruptions has been UPHELD
War-Related Powers - Military Courts and Tribunals - Regulations
Congress is authorized to make rules for the government and regulation of ARMED FORCES
1) Judicial Review
2) Enemy Civilians and Soldiers
3) American Soldiers
4) American Civilians
War-Related Powers - Military Courts and Tribunals - Judicial Review
Regular federal (or state) ct.s have NO general power to review court-martial proceedings
War-Related Powers - Military Courts and Tribunals - Enemy Civilians and Soldiers
Enemy civilians and soldiers MAY be tried by MILITARY CT.S
Congress has no power to DENY HABEAS CORPUS REVIEW to all aliens detained as enemy combatants, ABSENT a meaningful SUBSTITUTE for habeas corpus review
War-Related Powers - Military Courts and Tribunals - American Soldiers
Military ct.s have jurisdiction over ALL OFFENSES committed be persons who are MEMBERS of the armed services both at the TIME OF the offense AND when CHARGED for the offense
War-Related Powers - Military Courts and Tribunals - American Citizens
American civilians MAY be tried by military ct.s under martial law ONLY if ACTUAL WARFARE forces the fed. ct.s to SHUT DOWN
Habeaus Corpus
A writ REQUIRING a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court, especially to secure the person’s release, UNLESS lawful grounds are shown for their detention
Investigatory Power
Power of Congress to investigate is IMPLIED
Investigation must be expressly or impliedly AUTHORIZED by the appropriate congressional house
Property Power
Congress has the power to dispose of and make rules for territories and other properties of the US
No express limit on Congress’s power to DISPOSE of property, federal TAKINGS ([Eminent Domain]) must be for the purpose of effectuating an ENUMERATED power under some other provision of the C
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Eminent Domain
Refers to the power of the government to take private property and convert it into public use.
5th Amendment provides that the government may ONLY exercise this power if they provide JUST COMPENSATION to the property owners
No Federal Police Power
Congress has NO general police power
BUT has police power type powers over D.C., fed. lands, military bases, and Indian reservations (based on power over the capital and its property owner)
(Answer choice attempts to support fed. action on basis of police power (e.g.: “Congress can constitutionally act under the police power” or “the action is valid under the federal police power”), see if the facts pertain to D.C. or other federal possessions. If not, its an incorrect choice)
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Bankruptcy Powers
Congress’s power to establish uniform rules for bankruptcy is NONEXCLUSIVE
States may legislate AS LONG AS their laws do not conflict with federal law
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Postal Power
Postal power is EXCLUSIVE
Under the postal power, Congress MAY validly classify and place reasonable restrictions on the use of the mails, but may NOT DEPRIVE any citizen, or group of citizens, of the general mail “privilege”
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Power Over Citizenship
Congress may establish uniform rules of NATURALIZATION
This gives Congress plenary (unqualified/absolute) power over aliens
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Power Over Citizenship - Exclusion of Aliens
Aliens have NO RIGHT TO ENTER the US and can be refused entry summarily because of their POLITICAL beliefs
RESIDENT ALIENS are entitled to NOTICE AND A HEARING before they can be deported
Power Over Citizenship - Naturalization and Denaturalization
Congress has EXCLUSIVE power over naturalization and denaturalization
Congress may NOT TAKE AWAY the citizenship of ANY citizen - native-born or naturalized - WITHOUT HIS CONSENT
Admiralty Power
Congress’s admiralty power is PLENARY (unqualified/absolute) and EXCLUSIVE, unless Congress leaves maritime matters to state jurisdiction
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Power to Coin Money and Fix Weights and Measures
Congress has the power to COIN MONEY and FIX standards for weights and measurements
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Patent/Copyright Power
Congress has the power to control the issuance of PATENTS and COPYRIGHTS
Enumerated/Implied Powers
Speech or Debate Clause - Immunity for Federal Legislators
Conduct that occurs in the REGULAR COURSE of the fed. legislative process and the MOTIVATION behind that conduct are IMMUNE from prosecution
Does not cover bribes, speeches outside Congress, or replication in a press release or newsletter of a defamatory statement originally made in Congress
Separation of Powers - Bicameralism and Presentment Requirements
To pass a law, Congress must use BICAMERALISM followed by presentment to the President for signature or veto
Attempts without bicameralism and presentment = INVALID
Bicameralism = passage of a bill by BOTH houses of Congress
