Exam 1

Question 1

Ex Parte McCardle (1869)

Answer 1

Question: May Congress withdraw jurisdiction from the High Court after that jurisdiction has been given?

Conclusion: yes, Court validated congressional withdrawal of the Court’s jurisdiction on the basis of the Exceptions Clause of Article III Section 2; does not affect the jurisdiction that was previously exercised

Question 2

the Doctrine of Constitutional Avoidance

Answer 2

a legal doctrine of judicial review in US constitutional law that dictates that US federal courts should refuse to rule on a constitutional issue if the case can be resolved without involving constitutionality (plurality; does not become precedent)

Question 3

Duncan v. Louisiana (1968)

Answer 3

Issue: Was the State of Louisiana obligated to provide a trial by jury in criminal cases such as Duncan’s?

Ruling: Yes, Louisiana was required to provide trial by jury in criminal cases because the 6th Amendment’s guarantee of trial by jury was fundamental to the American scheme of justice, and states were obligated under the 14th Amendment to provide such trials

Question 4

State Supreme Courts (2)

Answer 4

1. equivalent power to SCOTUS - can only be appealed to SCOTUS if the issue is found in violation of the Constitution or federal statutes
2. no “fact-finding,” only “issues of law” - no real trials

Question 5

writ of certiorari

Answer 5

a petition from the lower court/individual for the higher court to look at a case on its merits and see if it deserves to be heard

Question 6

per curiam opinion

Answer 6

no author; quite brief

Question 7

limits on standing requirements (2)

Answer 7

1. third-party standing: a party may only exert their own rights and cannot raise rights of individuals not before the Court
2. prohibition of generalized grievances: a party cannot bring suit if the injury in question is undifferentiated way from many people

Question 8

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Answer 8

Issue:
1. Does Marbury have a legal right to the job?
2. Is there a legal remedy for his circumstances?
3. Does the Supreme Court have the right to issue that remedy?

Ruling:
1. Yes, Marbury does possess a legal right to the job.
2. Yes, a writ of mandamus is the appropriate legal action for his circumstance.
3. No, the Supreme Court does not have the authority to issue the writ.

Question 9

Flast v. Cohen (1968)

Answer 9

Question: Did Flast, as a taxpayer, have standing to sue the government’s spending program?

Conclusion: Court rejected the government’s argument that constitutional scheme of separation of powers barred taxpayer suits against federal taxing and spending programs

Question 10

Flast v. Cohen (1968) - “requisite personal stake” (2)

Answer 10

1. a nexus between their status as a taxpayer/person involved in the case and the legislative overreach/action must exist
2. a nexus between the legislative action and the amount/power of Congress to tax and spend

Question 11

Baker v. Carr (1962)

Answer 11

Question: Did the SC have jurisdiction over questions of legislative apportionment? (Political Question Doctrine)

Conclusion: Court held that there were no such “political questions” to be answered in this case and that legislative apportionment was a justiciable issue

Question 12

Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority (1936) - Justice Brandeis Concurrence

Answer 12

Question: Did Congress exceed its power in implementing and administering the TVA?

Conclusion: No, Court held Congress did not abuse its power with the TVA due to the location where the TVA was in business had been built originally in the interest of national defense

Question 13

Justice Brandeis’s Rules for “Judicial Self Restraint” (7)

Answer 13

1. the Court is not a means to an alternative end
2. the Court is not a means for advice or indecision
3. the Court is minimal
4. the Court is not baseless
5. the Court does not interest itself in motions of performance
6. the Court does not engage in indulgence
7. the Court will side with constitutionality

Question 14

threshold issues

Answer 14

represent a set of preliminary conditions that a case must meet before the court can address the “real” issue in the case

Question 15

Barron v. Baltimore (1833)

Answer 15

Issue: Does the 5th Amendment deny the states as well as the national government the right to take private property for public use without justly compensating the property’s owner?

Ruling: No, 5th Amendment only applies to federal government, citing the intent of the framers and the development of the Bill of Rights as an exclusive check

Question 16

Hurtado v. California (1884)

Answer 16

Issue: Does a state criminal proceeding based on an information rather than a grand jury indictment violate the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause?

Ruling: No, this was not a violation of the DP Clause of the 14th Amendment because the words “due process of law” do not necessarily require an indictment by a grand jury and cannot retroactively apply to the states

Question 17

incorporation

Answer 17

the process whereby provisions of the Bill of Rights are declared included in the due process guarantee of the 14th Amendment and made applicable to the states

Question 17

Palko v. Connecticut (1937)

Answer 17

Issue: Does Palko’s second conviction violate the protection against double jeopardy guaranteed by the 5th Amendment because this protection applies to the states by virtue of the 14th Amendment’s DP clause?

Ruling: No, Palko’s second conviction does not violate the protection against double jeopardy because protection against double jeopardy was not a fundamental right and, therefore, not applied to the states

Question 18

Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)

Answer 18

Issue: Did the Cantwells convictions violate the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause as it applies to the states through the DPC of the 14th Amendment?

Ruling: Yes, they were violated because while general regulations on solicitation were legitimate, restrictions based on religious grounds were not

Created the Valid Secular Policy Test

Question 19

Valid Secular Policy Test

Answer 19

states cannot have regulations that restrict action based on religious grounds; there must be a valid secular purpose to the law

Question 20

laws that burden religion must meet 2 criteria

Answer 20

1. must have an important, neutral, secular end
2. they must use the least restrictive means

Question 21

Sherbert v. Verner (1963)

Answer 21

Issue: Did the denial of unemployment compensation violate the 1st and 14th Amendments?

Ruling: Yes, because the state’s eligibility restrictions for unemployment compensation imposed a significant burden on Sherbert’s ability to freely exercise her faith

Question 22

Sherbert Standard or Compelling State Interest (2)

Answer 22

1. law must have a compelling state interest to regulate religious action
2. law must use the least restrictive means possible

Question 23

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

Answer 23

Did Wisconsin’s requirement that all parents send their children to school at least until age 16 violate the FEC of the 1st Amendment as it applies to the states under the DPC of the 14th Amendment?

Ruling: Yes, it was a violation of the FEC because that individual’s interests in the free exercise of religion under the 1st Amendment outweighed the state’s interest in compelling school attendance beyond the 8th grade

Question 24

Employment Division v. Smith (1990)

Answer 24

Issue: Can a state deny unemployment benefits to a worker fired for using illegal drugs for religious purposes? Ruling: Yes, because allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind"

Question 25

Church of the Lukumi Babalu v. Hialeah (1993)

Answer 25

Issue: Did the city of Hialeah's ordinance, prohibiting ritual animal sacrifices, violate the FEC of the 1st Amendment as it applies to the states...? Ruling: Yes, the ordinance did violate the FEC because it singled out the activities of the Santeria faith and suppressed more religious conduct than was necessary to achieve their stated ends

Question 26

incidental impact test

Answer 26

religion does not grant an exception from otherwise valid laws

Question 27

City of Boerne v. Flores (1997)

Answer 27

Issue: Did Congress exceed its 14th Amendment enforcement powers by enacting the RFRA which, in part, subjected local ordinances to federal regulation? Ruling: Yes, Congress did exceed its powers because while they may enact such legislation as the RFRA, in an attempt to prevent the abuse of religious freedoms, it may not determine the manner in which states enforce the substance of its legislative restrictions

Question 28

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014)

Answer 28

Issue: Does the RFRA allow a for-profit company to deny its employees health coverage of contraception to which the employees would otherwise be entitled to based on the religious objections of the company's owners? Ruling: Yes, because the contraception requirement forces religious corporations to fund something that goes against their stated religious principles, creating a substantial burden that is not the least restrictive method of satisfying the government's interests

Question 29

Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. CO CRC (2018)

Answer 29

Issue: Does the application of Colorado's public accommodations law to compel a cake maker to design and make a cake that violates religious beliefs about same-sex marriage violate the FEC of the 1st Amendment as it applies...? Ruling: Yes, it does violate the FEC because while same-sex couples are afforded civil rights protections under the laws and Constitution, religious and philosophical objections to same-sex marriage are protected views and can also be protected forms of expression

Question 30

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (2021)

Answer 30

Issue: Does the government violate the First Amendment by conditioning a religious agency’s ability to participate in the foster care system by taking actions and making statements that directly contradict the agency’s religious beliefs? Ruling: Yes, it does violate the FEC because the Philadelphia law was not neutral and generally applicable since it allowed for exceptions to the anti-discrimination requirement at the sole discretion of the Commissioner

Question 31

Carson v. Makin (2022)

Answer 31

Issue: Does a state law prohibiting students participating in an otherwise generally available student-aid program from choosing to use their aid to attend schools that provide religious, or “sectarian,” instruction violate the Religion Clauses or Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution? Ruling: Yes, it does violate the FEC because it prohibited families from using otherwise available scholarship funds at religious schools

Question 32

Everson v. Board of Ed (1947)

Answer 32

Issue: Did the New Jersey statute violate the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment as made applicable to the states...? Ruling: No, the law did not violate the Constitution because services like bussing and police/fire protection for parochial schools are "separate and so indisputably marked off from the religious function" that for the state to provide them would not violate the 1st Amendment

Question 33

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

Answer 33

Issue: Was it an abuse of a court's discretion to allow payment of allocated funds to nonpublic religious schools, after such allocations were found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court? Excessive entanglement? Ruling: No, the funds did not violate any constitutional interest because the denial of payment would have serious repercussion on the private schools

Question 34

Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)

Answer 34

Issue: Did the Louisiana law, which mandated the teaching of "creation science" along with the theory of evolution, violate the EC of the 1st Amendment as it applies...? Ruling: Yes, the law violated the Constitution because it fails all three prongs of the Lemon Test

Question 35

Kennedy v. Bremerton (2021)

Answer 35

Issue: Is the prevention of Kennedy’s speech a violation of the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment as it applies to the states through the DPC of the 14th Amendment? Ruling: Yes, the prevention does violate the EC because the District cannot show that its prohibition of Kennedy's prayer serves a compelling purpose and is narrowly tailored to achieving that purpose

Question 36

McCreary v. ACLU (2005)

Answer 36

Issue: 1. Do Ten Commandments displays in public schools and in courthouses violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, which prohibits government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion?" 2. Was a determination that the displays' purpose had been to advance religion sufficient for the displays' invalidation? Ruling: Yes and yes. The displays violated the EC because their purpose had been to advance religion.

Question 37

Van Orden v. Perry (2005)

Answer 37

Issue: Does a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of a state capitol building violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, which barred the government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion?" Ruling: No, it does not violate the EC because the monument has historical meaning..."simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the EC"

Question 38

American Legion v. American Humanist Association (2019)

Answer 38

Issue: 1. Is the display and maintenance of the cross unconstitutional? 2. Under what test should the constitutionality of a passive display incorporating religious symbolism be assessed? 3. Does the expenditure of funds to maintain the cross amount to the government’s excessive entanglement with religion? Ruling: No, it does not violate the EC because, while the cross originated as a Christian symbol, it has also taken on a secular meaning for WWI. The Lemon Test was not applied.

Question 39

Shurtleff v. Boston (2022)

Answer 39

Issue: Does Boston’s refusal to fly a private religious organization’s flag depicting a cross on a city flagpole violate the organization’s First Amendment rights? Ruling: Yes, the refusal to fly a religious flag does violate the 1st Amendment because the flag-raising program does not constitute government speech

Question 40

Lee v. Wiseman (1992)

Answer 40

Issue: Does the inclusion of clergy who offer prayers at official public school ceremonies violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as it applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment? Ruling: Yes, the ceremonies violate the EC because the government involvement in this case creates "a state-sponsored and state-directed religious exercise in a public school," creating subtle and indirect coercion for students to participate

Question 41

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000)

Answer 41

Issue: Does the Santa Fe Independent School District's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as it applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment? Ruling: Yes, the District's policy permitting student-led prayer does violate the EC because the prayers were public speech authorized by a government policy and taking place on government property at government-sponsored school-related events

Question 42

Town of Greece v. Galloway (2014)

Answer 42

Issue: Does the invocation of prayer at a legislative session violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment even in the absence of discrimination in the selection of prayer-givers and content? Ruling: No, it does not violate the EC because the context and jurisprudence surrounding the 1st Amendment suggested that the EC was never meant to prohibit legislative prayer, which created the proper deliberative mood and acknowledged religion's role in society

Question 43

influences on thought (2)

Answer 43

1. Montesquieu 2. Federalist No. 78

Question 44

Montesquieu - influences on thought (4)

Answer 44

1. The Spirit of Law (1748) 2. foundations of separation of powers (cannot justify the "equal status" to the other two entities) 3. Puissance de juger - power of judging - the announcement of the law through the settlement of disputes 4. judicial decisions are there for the protection of the individual and their liberties (Procedural Due Process)

Question 45

Federalist No. 78 - influences on thought (5)

Answer 45

1. Alexander Hamilton (1788) 2. independent of the judiciary v. accountability of judges 3. the least dangerous branch 4. primary concern was that judges would assert their own personal will in interpretations of the law 5. the power to interpret the fundamentals of the law lies in the hands of judges...

Question 46

judicial review - de Tocqueville

Answer 46

the power of a court to review the actions of a government's executive, legislative, or administrative branches to determine if they are in line with the law

Question 47

kinds of cases SCOTUS hears

Answer 47

appeals from the circuit courts or state supreme courts on matters of federal statutory law and federal constitutional law

Question 48

judiciary act of 1789 (5)

Answer 48

1. set number of Justices on the SC (chief justice and 5 associate justices) 2. set 13 judicial districts 3. created office of Attorney General 4. created offices of US Attorney and US Marshal for each district 5. enabled SCOTUS to issue writs of mandamus

Question 49

writs of mandamus

Answer 49

a type of judicial remedy that consists of an order from the body of the court to a government official or entity to perform a task or duty that they are legally required to do or to refrain from doing

Question 50

structure of the courts (3)

Answer 50

1. Supreme Court (1) 2. appellate courts (13) 3. district courts (94)

Question 51

district courts (3)

Answer 51

1. lowest level of the federal system 2. hear both civil and criminal cases 3. trial courts (first time a case is heard)

Question 52

the Court of Appeals (3)

Answer 52

1. middle level of the court system that handles all cases appealed to them 2. hears cases in panels of 3 or en banc 3. creates binding precedent for all federal courts within their circuit

Question 53

US Supreme Court (2)

Answer 53

1. currently has 9 sitting justices (one chief justice and 8 associate justices) 2. Court of Last Resort - supreme law of the land

Question 54

senatorial courtesy

Answer 54

the custom of the president or his proxies to ask for nominees from the Senator's state

Question 55

"blue slip"

Answer 55

an opinion written by the "home state" Senators about the quality of a nominee that is sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee

Question 56

vetting

Answer 56

the investigative process that each candidate undergoes for potential problems

Question 57

to "bork"

Answer 57

to defame or vilify a person systematically to prevent them from being appointed to public office

Question 58

rule of four

Answer 58

the procedure by which the judges vote on whether to hear a case; at least 4 judges are required to vote to hear a case for it to be granted cert and be placed on the docket

Question 59

factors that can influence granting cert (5)

Answer 59

1. lower court disparity or a "circuit split" 2. number of amicus briefs (3+ on a lower court decision) 3. government involvement in the issue 4. conflict between federal and state entities 5. constitutional issue importance

Question 60

amicus curiae

Answer 60

"friend of the court" briefs written by special interest groups to support a client

Question 61

regular concurrence

Answer 61

written by a Justice in the majority who agrees with the decision but wishes to emphasize a particular point

Question 62

special concurrence

Answer 62

written by a Justice in the majority who agrees with the decision but for different reasons than those laid out in the majority

Question 63

precedent opinion

Answer 63

majority opinion has 5 members signed on it

Question 64

plurality opinion

Answer 64

less than 5 members signed on it and has no precedential value

Question 65

dissenting opinion

Answer 65

Justices detail the reasons why they disagree with the majority opinion

Question 66

methods of interpretation (9)

Answer 66

1. originalism 2. original meaning 3. textualism 4. structural analysis 5. stare decisis 6. pragmatism 7. national identity "ethos" 8. moral reasoning 9. historical practices

Question 67

judicial activism

Answer 67

the practice of judges to make rulings based on their own policy views or other characteristics that would influence applications of law

Question 68

judicial restraint

Answer 68

the practice of judges to make rulings relying on a reluctance to reinterpret the law and a focus on stare decisis

Question 69

jurisdiction

Answer 69

the authority of a court to hear and decide legal disputes and to enforce its ruling

Question 70

when can a court preside? (3)

Answer 70

1. does the Court have personal jurisdiction of a case? 2. does the Court have jurisdiction over the subject matter? 3. does the Court have the jurisdiction to render the judgment sought?

Question 71

personal jurisdiction

Answer 71

question of whether the court may even hear a case involving a particular defendant

Question 72

in personam

Answer 72

against the person; concerns the status of a person wherever he/she/they are

Question 73

in rem

Answer 73

against a thing; concerns the status of a piece of property or person only when they are in that specific place

Question 74

subject matter jurisdiction - jurisdiction ratione materiae

Answer 74

the power of a court to adjudicate a particular type of matter and provide the remedy demanded (bankruptcy court has jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases)

Question 75

original jurisdiction

Answer 75

the legal authority of a court of first instance or trial

Question 76

appellate jurisdiction

Answer 76

the legal authority of a superior court to review and render judgement on a decision of a lower court

Question 77

discretionary jurisdiction

Answer 77

the legal authority of a court to decide whether to hear a case brought before it

Question 78

mandatory jurisdiction

Answer 78

the legal authority of a court that states that a court MUST hear a case brought before it

Question 79

formal barriers to judicial action (4)

Answer 79

1. court must have authority to hear the case (jurisdiction) 2. must be a case or controversy 3. case must be appropriate for judicial resolution (justiciable) 4. appropriate party must bring the case (standing)

Question 80

justiciability (5)

Answer 80

the ability of a court to determine if a case is "fit" for resolution 1. advisory opinions 2. mootness 3. ripeness 4. collusion 5. political question

Question 81

controversey

Answer 81

identifies the scope of the matters in which the federal courts can intervene and what can be considered as a case

Question 82

standing

Answer 82

party bringing suit must have suffered a direct and significant injury that is traceable to act in question and can be resolved by judicial decision (injury in fact, causation, and redressability)

Question 83

advisory opinions

Answer 83

seeking advice in which no actual issue exists but an opinion is sought; violates the idea of a "case and controversy"

Question 84

mootness

Answer 84

judicial action can no longer provide the requested relief due to changes in circumstances since the filing of the case

Question 85

ripeness

Answer 85

threat of injury or adverse government action must be "real" the sense that it must be immediate and highly likely to occur

Question 86

political question (3)

Answer 86

1. should avoid questions that are best resolved by the other branches of government 2. political questions fall outside judicial competence no matter who raises the question, no matter what controversy might burn, or whose interests it affects 3. grounded in separation of powers

Question 87

3 ways to view the Establishment Clause?

Answer 87

1. a "wall of separation" between church and state 2. the State cannot/should not show preference to one religion over another 3. that there should be no establishment of a "national" religion

Question 88

key points from Everson v. Education (2)

Answer 88

1. incorporated the EC to the states via the DPC of the 14th Amendment 2. adopted the view of a wall separating church and state

Question 89

Abington Township standard for the Court to approach Establishment cases (2)

Answer 89

1. the law must have a secular legislative purpose 2. the primary effect of the law must neither advance nor inhibit religion

Question 90

Walz v. Tax Commission of New York (1971) created third prong of the standard for Establishment cases:

Answer 90

the law must not promote excessive government entanglement beyond the primary effect

Question 91

Lemon Test (3)

Answer 91

1. statue must have a secular legislative purpose 2. statue's primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion 3. statute must avoid "an excessive government entanglement with religion"

Question 92

Impact of Kennedy v. Bremerton (2021)

Answer 92

the Lemon Test is "abandoned" in favor of a test that considers the "historical practices and understandings"

Question 93

Significance of Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Answer 93

Marshall established the principle of judicial review - the power to declare a law unconstitutional