ConstitutionalLawOutlineWord文件下载.docx

ConstitutionalLawOutlineWord文件下载.docx

《ConstitutionalLawOutlineWord文件下载.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ConstitutionalLawOutlineWord文件下载.docx（60页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

Britainwasbasedonaparliamentarysupremacysystem,butAmericansviewedBritishasuntruetotheirconstitutionalguarantees.Thisfeelinginformedtherevolution,whichmustbeunderstoodasaconstitutionalrevolution.

Oncedrafted,MadisonwasprofoundlydisappointedwiththeConstitution,forfailuretoprotecthumanrights,specificallywithregardstoreligionandslavery.HeviewedthedocumentasmorallybankruptandfeltthatitwouldultimatelydestroyAmerica.Additionallywasconcernedaboutprotectingpeopleagainstlibertyviolationsfromstates,whichheviewedasathreat.

oPostMadison,Americans,especiallyinthesouth,begintoacceptconstitutionalismwithslavery.Madison’spleasareoverlookedandforgotten.

oReconstructionAmendmentsfinallyallownationalpowertobeusedagainstthestates（specificallythe14thAmendment）,inanefforttoprotectindividualliberties.Thisbroadviewoftheamendmentsdidnotcatchoninitially,andwasnotfullyrealizeduntilpost-WWII,butitwasusedfromthestartasatooltoprotectirrationalracism.

oKingandthecivilrightsmovementhelptofullyrealizethe14thAmendmentasaguaranteeofhumanrights.

ConstitutionalInterpretation[classnotes,readingnotes]

ConstitutionalInterpretationbytheJudiciary,andJudicialReview

oMarburyv.Madison（US1803）[Guntherp.3,readingnotes1,classnotes4-7]

§

ConsiderstheentitlementofMarburytoanappointment,thatwasnotrealizedwithacommissionbythesubsequentJeffersonadministration.

ThecourtfindsthatMarburyhasarighttothecommissionasamatteroflaw,thereisaremedyatlaw,butfailstograntmandamusafterfindingthatthedisputewasimproperlybeforetheSupremeCourtonoriginaljurisdiction–deniesrelief.

Caseisimportantforitcreatestheconceptofjudicialreview.MarshalldeniesreliefbecausehethinksthattheJudiciaryActof1789’sgrantoforiginaljurisdictionformandamusisnotconsistentwithArticleIIIoftheConstitution,whichoutlinesinstanceswheretheSupremeCourtistohaveoriginaljurisdiction.Thusthereisalsoastrongargumentforconstitutionalsupremacy.

oMcCullochv.Maryland（US1819）[book90,reading7-8,class5]

Congresscharteredanationalbank,withbranchesinvariousstates.Marylandenactedataxtobeleviedagainstthenationalbankbranchinthestate.

Marshall,forthecourt,findsthatthestatetaxingofthefederalbankisunconstitutional,forithinderstheexerciseofnationalpower.Whilestateshavethepowertotax,theycannotexerciseitinawaythatisinoppositiontothefederalpowers.Herethefederalpowersareconstitutional,notexpressly,butonanimpliedbasis,andthusasthemeansarenarrowlytailoredtoalegitimategoal,judicialdeferenceisinorder.

Richardsnotesthatthiscasestandsfortheideathattherearesomematterswhicharejudicialinnature,andotherswhichareuniquelypolitical.Whenthelatteristhecase,judicialdeferenceisproper.

oLegislativeandExecutiveexerciseofconstitutionalreviewisnotunheardof.Presidentshaveusedthevetopowertorejectlegislationtheyviewasunconstitutional,Congresshasrejectedlegislationonsimilargrounds,andprosecutorialdiscretionandthepardonpowerhavebeenusedtomitigatetheeffectsoflawviewedasunconstitutional.[Class7,book22-27]

DemocraticObjectionstoJudicialReview[class7-13]

oJefferson

Arguedthatthebranchesofgovernmentarecoequal,andhavenoauthoritytomakefinalconstitutionaldecisionsforeachother.RejectedMarburyv.Madison,andtheconceptofjudicialreview–thoughrightsclearlyexist,theyonlybindthelegislature.Branchesareonlyaccountabletothepeople.

oCourtSkepticApproach–Thayer

ThreestagesofThayer’sperspective:

Judicialreviewisaninferredpowerfromtheconstitution

Thepowerofjudicialreviewislimitedtojudicialcontexts–anisonlyappropriatewhennecessarytodecideaconstitutionalissue

Courtmustbedeferentialinthereview.Courtshouldoperatebytheruleofclearmistake–onlyfindinglegislativeactsunconstitutionalwhentheyareclearlyerroneous.Thus,solongasthereisanyconstitutionalbasisforthelaw,courtsshoulddefer）.

Thayerdoesnotviewcourtsastheprimaryenforcersofhumanrights,butrather,asalastresortwhenthereisnotothermeansofkeepingtheconstitutionalstructureintact.Believesstronglyinanengagedcitizenrythatvigilantlydefendsitsrights.

oRightsSkepticApproach–Hand

TwopartstoHand’sperspective,whichcomesfromhisworkBillofRights:

Judicialreviewofcongressionallegislationisausurpation（fromhistory）

Rightsdonotexist,thusjudicialreviewtovalidatethemisinvalid（political