Constitutional Law flashcards

32 cards. Read the term and the definition here. The deck at the top of this page is optional.

Marbury v. Madison

1803 decision establishing judicial review: Article III courts may invalidate acts of Congress that conflict with the Constitution, which is supreme law and binding on judges.

Standing elements

Constitutional minimum: injury in fact that is concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent; causation fairly traceable to the defendant; and redressability through a favorable decision.

Political question doctrine

Nonjusticiable issues committed to other branches by the Constitution, including foreign recognition, impeachment trial procedure, and partisan gerrymandering challenges under Rucho v. Common Cause.

Exceptions clause power

Article III §2 lets Congress limit Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction, but it cannot reopen final judgments or prescribe outcomes in pending cases under United States v. Klein.

Substantial effects test

Commerce Clause power reaches intrastate activity that substantially affects interstate commerce, considering aggregation under Wickard v. Filburn; Lopez and Morrison reject attenuated chains of causation.

Anti-commandeering rule

Congress cannot compel state legislatures to enact federal programs or state executives to administer them; it may preempt state law or offer states choices with conditions.

Dole spending conditions

Congress may condition federal funds on state compliance if the condition serves the general welfare, is unambiguous, relates to the federal interest, and is not coercive.

Necessary and Proper Clause

McCulloch v. Maryland permits any means reasonably adapted to a legitimate enumerated end, so long as the means are not plainly prohibited by the Constitution.

Eleventh Amendment immunity

Bars private suits against states in federal court, including by their own citizens; it does not bar suits by the United States or by other states.

Ex parte Young exception

Permits federal suits for prospective injunctive relief against state officials violating federal law; retroactive monetary relief against the state remains barred.

Abrogation under Section 5

Congress may abrogate state sovereign immunity only with unmistakably clear language and a congruent, proportionate remedy for judicially identified Fourteenth Amendment violations.

Dormant Commerce Clause

State laws discriminating against interstate commerce face strict scrutiny; nondiscriminatory laws survive unless burdens clearly exceed local benefits under Pike balancing.

Youngstown three tiers

Presidential power is highest with express or implied congressional authorization, uncertain in congressional silence, and lowest when contrary to express congressional will.

Appointment Clause

Principal officers require presidential nomination and Senate confirmation; inferior officers may be appointed by the President, department heads, or courts of law.

Seila Law holding

A single-director Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with for-cause removal protection violated separation of powers; the removal restriction was severed from the statute.

Executive privilege limits

Presidential confidentiality yields to a specific need for evidence in a criminal trial, as in United States v. Nixon, and does not bar judicial process against the President.

Selective incorporation

Most Bill of Rights protections apply to states through the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause; grand jury indictment, Third Amendment, and civil jury trial are not incorporated.

Mathews v. Eldridge test

Procedural due process balances the private interest affected, the risk of erroneous deprivation and value of safeguards, and the government's fiscal and administrative burden.

Strict scrutiny formula

The law must serve a compelling governmental interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest; the burden rests on the government defending the classification.

Intermediate scrutiny formula

The classification must serve an important governmental interest and be substantially related to achieving it; applies to sex and illegitimacy classifications.

Washington v. Davis rule

A facially neutral law violates equal protection only if enacted with discriminatory intent; disparate impact alone is insufficient to establish a constitutional violation.

Brandenburg incitement test

Speech advocating lawless action is unprotected only if directed to inciting imminent lawless action and likely to produce it.

O'Brien test

Content-neutral regulation of expressive conduct is valid if within constitutional power, furthers an important interest unrelated to suppression of expression, and burdens no more speech than necessary.

Central Hudson test

Commercial speech that is lawful and not misleading may be regulated if the government interest is substantial, the regulation directly advances it, and it is narrowly tailored.

Public forum doctrine

Traditional public forums and designated forums require strict scrutiny for content-based rules; nonpublic forums permit reasonable, viewpoint-neutral restrictions.

Lemon test abandoned

Kennedy v. Bremerton (2022) replaced the Lemon purpose/effect/entanglement test with an analysis grounded in historical practices and traditions.

Smith free exercise rule

Neutral, generally applicable laws burdening religion are valid without individualized exemption; strict scrutiny applies only to laws targeting religious practice.

Ministerial exception

The Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses bar discrimination suits by ministers against religious employers over hiring and employment decisions central to religious mission.

Dobbs v. Jackson holding

Overruled Roe and Casey; abortion is not a federal constitutional right, and state regulation is reviewed under rational basis, leaving the issue to states.

Glucksberg method

Unenumerated fundamental rights must be objectively deeply rooted in the nation's history and tradition and implicit in ordered liberty; assisted suicide is not such a right.

State action requirement

Fourteenth Amendment claims require significant state involvement, shown by public function, entanglement, or encouragement; purely private conduct is not actionable.

Monell municipal liability

A municipality is liable under Section 1983 only for deprivations caused by an official policy, custom, or deliberate indifference in training, not for respondeat superior.