Constitutional Law Final Flashcards
Dual federalism
Levels of government don’t share power (layered cake).
What is federalism?
Share power with different levels of government (ex. state, federal, county, ect.).
Cooperative federalism
Different levels of government share power (marble cake).
What is devolution?
The transfer of power from a central government to subnational (e.g., state, regional, or local) authorities.
According to the Supreme Court in Cooley v. Board of Wardens of the Port of Philadelphia, did the state of Pennsylvania have the authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate pilots in its own port? Why or why not? What test did the Court establish in Cooley?
Yes, the state of Pennsylvania did have the authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate pilots in its own port because the Commerce Clause does not prohibit all state regulation of interstate commerce.
Test: (1) Law is local in nature and (2) requires state level regulation.
In Southern Pacific Company v. Arizona, how did the Supreme Court add to the test it had established in Cooley? How did the Court rule on the facts in this case?
This case added to the test in the Cooley case by requiring the law to interfere with interstate commerce in order order to be unconstitutional. In this case, the Court ruled that the Arizona train limit law seriously interferes with interstate commerce because trains keep having to unload at state boarders. Therefore, the Arizona train limit law violates the Commerce Clause and is unconstitutional.
What is the dormant commerce clause?
The “dormant” Commerce Clause, also known as the “negative” Commerce Clause, is a legal doctrine that courts in the United States have inferred from the Commerce Clause in Article I of the United States Constitution. The Commerce Clause expressly grants Congress the power to regulate commerce “among the several states.” The idea behind the dormant Commerce Clause is that this grant of power implies a negative converse — a restriction prohibiting a state from passing legislation that improperly burdens or discriminates against interstate commerce.
Test: In order to determine whether a law violates this so-called “dormant” aspect of the Commerce Clause, the court first asks whether it discriminates on its face against interstate commerce. In this context, “discrimination” simply means differential treatment of in-state and out-of-state economic interests that benefits the former and burdens the latter. Thus, in a dormant Commerce Clause case, a court is initially concerned with whether the law facially discriminates against out-of-state actors or has the effect of favoring in-state economic interests over out-of-state interests.
According to the Supreme Court in Maine v. Taylor, could Maine constitutionally ban the importation of live baitfish? Why or why not? What test did the Supreme Court establish for state statutes that affirmatively discriminate against interstate commerce?
Maine could constitutionally ban the importation of live baitfish because Maine’s law was not in violation of the Commerce Clause. Test for state statutes that affirmatively discriminate against interstate commerce: (1) does the state’s regulation serve a legitimate purpose? yes; (2) is there a method that is not-discriminajtory? no = Congress cannot regulate.
What does the 10th Amendment do?
Grants states sovereignty which limits Congress’s power. If the federal government doesn’t have power in a specific area, then the states do. States have power where there are holes in federal power.
In National League of Cities v. Usery, did the Supreme Court rule that the 10th Amendment prevents Congress from making minimum wage and overtime laws applicable to state employees? Why or why not?
Facts: Federal government was trying to stabilize minimum wage by using the Commerce Clause to enforce the Federal Minimum Wage Law on all state employees in every state.
Issue: Does the Federal Minimum Wage Law violate the 10th Amendment? Yes (5-4).
Reasoning: Traditional state government function. State regulatory immunity. Justice Blackmun was in favor of the ruling but was bothered by it because of the right to freedom of contract.
In Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, why did the Supreme Court change its ruling from that decided in the National League of Cities case?
Facts: Reversed National League of Cities v. Usery case. Federal Labor Standards Act. Congress wanted to enforce a national minimum wage/overtime laws.
Issue: Does the Federal Labor Standards Act violate the 10th Amendment? No
Reasoning: Justice Blackmun. Difficulty of line drawing to determine what is or is not a traditional state government function. they didn’t want to use a historical standard of review. It will lead to inconsistent results. There are other procedural safeguards to protect state power: 2 senators per state, electoral college role. Constitution protects these powers. FLSA is fair = no violation of 10th Amendment.
In New York v. United States, why was the take-title provision of the federal radioactive waste law found to be a violation of the 10th Amendment?
The take-title provision required that any state that doesn’t comply with the hazardous waste dumping rules must take title/ownership of hazardous waste. The take-title incentive was in violation of the 10th Amendment because Congress cannot use coercion to force regulation; they can only encourage compliance.
According to the Supreme Court in Printz v. United States, why were provisions of the federal Brady Bill a violation of the 10th Amendment?
Facts: Brady Bill = gun control law. Passed by Congress. Background checks required on people who buy guns. State/local law enforcement were to conduct background checks by this federal law. Two police officers protested saying feds can’t commandeer state employees. The provisions of the Brady Bill are therefore a violation of the 10th Amendment. Scalia was an advocate for state’s rights. The federal government cannot compel state employees to enact federal programs. Protects state sovereignty/autonomy. Scalia never actually states that the federal Brady Bill is violating the 10th Amendment. States are independent political entities.
What does the 11th Amendment do? How has the Supreme Court interpreted the meaning of the 11th Amendment? Who does the 11th Amendment apply to?
States can have sovereign immunity in federal court. The 11th Amendment applies to: Diversity jurisdiction (parties are diverse in citizenship), and federal question doctrine (violation of federal law).
Chisolm v. Georgia (1793)
Citizens of one state can sue another state in federal court –> 11th Amendment passed. Feds do not have jurisdiction in cases where citizens of one state sue another state. Citizens cannot sue own or different state in federal court. However, states can sue other states in federal court. Allows (suits in federal court ): injunctions, federal government v. state, state v. state, citizens v. cities/counties, state can consent to be sued. States can grant themselves state immunity from federal court in their own state constitutions.
In Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, was Congress able to waive Florida’s immunity from lawsuit without the state’s permission?
Congress can waive state immunity under the 11th Amendment by using the 14th Amendment. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment gives Congress power to enforce it. 14th Amendment was passed after the 11 Amendment.
What are the facts of the Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs? In that case, did the Court uphold Hibbs’s claim against Nevada in federal court? Why or why not?
Facts: Family Medical Leave Act permits citizens to sue their employers in federal court if they violate the provisions of the FLMA.
Issue: Is the Act a violation of the 11th Amendment? No.
Holding: The Court upheld Hibbs’s claim against Nevada in federal court.
Reasoning: Congress can waive the immunity of a state using the 14th Amendment. Equal protection case (14th Amendment).
When can Congress abrogate a state’s immunity under the 11th Amendment?
Congress can waive the immunity of a state using the 14th Amendment. When there’s a 14th Amendment claim.
What are the facts of Wesberry v. Sanders (1964)?
Facts: James P. Wesberry, Jr. filed a suit against the Governor of Georgia, Carl E. Sanders, protesting the state’s apportionment scheme. The Fifth Congressional District, of which Wesberry was a member, had a population two to three times larger than some of the other districts in the state. Wesberry claimed this system diluted his right to vote compared to other Georgia residents.
Districts: federal congressional districts. Part of Constitution: Article I, Section 2. Voting Rights Standard: one person, one vote principle. How much equality is required? Almost precise mathematical equality.
What are the facts of Reynolds v. Sims (1964)?
Facts. This case was a challenge to the malapportionment of the Alabama legislature. The challengers claimed discrimination against voters in counties whose populations that had grown proportionally far more than others since the 1900 census. The complaints noted that the existing districting scheme was based on the1900 census, even though the state constitution required legislative representation based on population and decennial reapportionment. The lower federal court found that the old apportionment scheme, as well as two new ones devised by the legislature, violated equal protection.
Districts: state legislative districts. Part of Constitution: 14th Amendment, Equal Protection Clause. Voting rights standard: One person, one vote principle. How much equality is required? Above 10% deviation must be supported by legitimate state consideration.
What is a malapportioned district?
This term refers to inequalities between the number of voters in electoral districts which have the same number of representatives. Voters in electoral districts with a large number of voters have less voting power than voters in electoral districts with only a few voters. For this reason, malapportionment is often referred to as vote weighting. A malapportioned district is a district with a population not drawn equally.
When does a malapportioned congressional (federal) district violate Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution?
Weberry v. Sanders (1964). Districts: federal congressional districts. Part of Constitution: Article I, Section 2. Voting rights standard: one person, one vote princople. How much equality is required? Almost precise mathematical equality.
When does a malapportioned legislative (state) district violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution?
Reynolds v. Sims (1964). Districts: state legislative districts. Part of Constitution: 14th Amendment, Equal Protection Clause. Voting rights standard: one person, one vote principle. How much equality is required? Above 10% deviation must be supported by legitimate state consideration.
Do districts have to be drawn with mathematical precision? If not, what is the standard for the drawing of federal and state district lines?
Yes; districts have to be drawn with mathematical precision. Standard for drawing federal and state district lines: one person, one vote principle.
How much deviation from mathematical equality is allowed in the apportionment of federal and state districts?
Federal: almost precise mathematical equality.
State: about 10% deviation must be supported by legitimate state consideration.
