Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Interpreting the constitution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Interpreting the constitution
Caroline Vukicevich
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Constitutional Question: Does the State of Maryland have the power, under Article 1 Section 8 Clauses 1 and 18, to impose taxes on an institution created by Congress? Does Congress have the power under Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution to establish a bank?
Background Information: In 1816, Congress established a National Bank of the United States. In the same year, the State of Maryland imposed taxes on all banks of which were owned by the state. The lawsuit was filed when James McCulloch, an employee of a branch of the bank, refused to pay the tax. The State of Maryland filed a lawsuit on McCulloch stating that Maryland has the authority to impose taxes on any business in it’s state.
…show more content…
Allowing students to object to reciting the prayer did not make it constitutional. The court decided that the nondenominational aspect of the prayer did not make it Constitutional either. The law was in fact in violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.
Baker v. Carr (1962) Constitutional Question: Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction, under the “equal protection” clause of the 14th Amendment, over questions of legislative appointment? Background Information: Charles Baker, a resident of Tennessee, sued Joe Carr, who was the Secretary of State of Tennessee. This case involved a 1901 law, which was created to assign the seats for the states legislature. Urban areas had rapid population growth, and Baker felt that the law made Tennessee underrepresented. Baker asserted that this law of 1901 violated the “equal protection” clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Opinion: The court ruled that the national courts do have the authority to determine the Constitutionality of an appointment made in the Legislative Branch. Justice William J. Brennan Jr. wrote the opinion that this case did not prevent judicial review because it did not bring up a “political question.” It did not bring up an issue to be discussed by a different government branch. This was a separation of powers
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
Brennan (Majority Decision): Justice Brennan read the decision which stated that the ruling from the previous court was not consistent with decisions from other courts regarding the same types of cases (Pembaur v. Cincinnati, 1986).
In 1971 in Mobile County Alabama the School Board created a state statute that set aside time at the beginning of each day for silent ’meditation’ (statute 6-1-20), and in 1981 they added another statute 16-1-20.1 which set aside a minute for ‘silent prayer’ as well. In addition to these, in 1982 the Mobile County School Board enacted statute 16-1-20.2, which specified a prayer that teachers could lead ‘willing’ students in “From henceforth, any teacher or professor in any public educational institution within the State of Alabama, recognizing that the Lord God is one, at the beginning of any homeroom or any class, may pray, may lead willing students in prayer, or may lead the willing students in the following prayer to God… “ (Jaffree By and Through Jaffree v. James). Ishmael Jaffree was the father of three students, Jamael Aakki Jaffree, Makeba Green, and Chioke Saleem Jaffree, who attended a school in Mobile County Alabama. Jaffree complained that his children had been pressured into participating in religious activities by their teachers and their peers, and that he had requested that these activities stopped. When the school did nothing about Jaffree’s complaints he filed an official complaint with the Mobile County School Board through the United States District Courts. The original complaint never mentioned the three state statutes that involved school prayer. However, on June 4, 1982 Jaffree changed his complaint. He now wanted to challenge the constitutionality of statutes 16-1-20, 16-1-20.1 and 16-1-20.2, and motioned for a preliminary injunction. The argument against these state laws was that they were an infringement of the Establishment Clause within the First Amendment of the Constitution, which states that Congr...
This example of a Supreme Court case shows that the court is not above politics. Even though most Americans, including government officials, practiced some form of Christianity, the judges were not willing to compromise the information in the Constitution for the popular beliefs of individuals. I agree with the Supreme Court in its decision to ban the practice of prayer in public schools. Not only does it violate the Constitution, but it encroaches on our freedom of thought and action. Being excluded from a public classroom because of personal beliefs does not sound just.
Despite the oncoming bankruptcy of the state banks, prior to Jackson’s administration the government did not show much support in their survival. In fact, the government played a large role in the functioning of the Second Ban...
1. The court stated that they did have power to hear this case: "Since the court has consistently exercised the power to construe and delineate claims arising under express powers, it must follow that the Court has authority to interpret claims with respect to powers alleged to derive from enumerated powers."
Despite the downfall of the Federalist Party in the early nineteenth century, John Marshall continued to exert a strong Federalist influence on the government, which acted as a catalyst to ignite political controversy. In the McCullough vs. Maryland trial of 1819, Marshall deemed Maryland taxing the second bank of the United States as being unconstitutional, which gave even more power to the central government. (Doc D) Majority of the American population was against his ruling and refuted it because many people believed that having a strong central government was bad because if a bad decision was made, it would have affected the entire union, whereas if there was a strong state government, a bad decision would have just hurt the state. However, this was not the only time where the economy had failed in the early 1800’s. In 1816, John Randolph addressed congress and stated that it was unjust to tax the poo...
views as to whether or not Judicial review, and the Supreme Court as a whole,
The evolution of power gained by the Federal government can be seen in the McCuloch versus Maryland (1819) case. This case des...
The final clause of the first section of the fourteenth amendment explains, "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 2 The 1976 ruling of Gregg v....
Once the ratification process passed for the new US Constitution, two political figures, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, begun the first debate about the creation of the First Bank of the United States. Hamilton argued the bank was related to powers within the Necessary and Proper Clause; whereas Jefferson argued that it was not an exception to the clause’s powers. Also, the 18th Clause has caused debate on the constitutionality of court decisions and actions of states. It allowed for the national government to turn down a state’s right to tax the Second Bank of the United States.
States ratified Jim Crow laws to legally segregate whites from blacks and they created separate schools, facilities, parks, and other separated places. When Plessy was arrested, he petitioned the Louisiana Supreme Court against Ferguson in order “to stop the proceedings against him for criminal violation of the state law.” (Handout) Yet again, the Louisiana Supreme Court refused and he went to the Supreme Court of the United States. The arguments in this case involve the 13th Amendment, which took away slavery and the Equal Protection clause of the 14 Amendment, which “prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” When this went to the Supreme Court of the United States, Plessy was brought to court against Judge John H. Ferguson. (http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equal_protection) Was a state law requiring separate accommodations a violation of equal protection? Should the St...
The extents of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution has been long discussed since its adoption in mid-late 1800s. Deciding cases like Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade has been possible due to mentioned amendment. These past cases not only show the progression of American society, but also highlights the degree of versatility that is contained within the amendment. Now, in 2015, the concerns are not of racial segregation or abortion, the extent of the amendment was brought to a new field: same-sex marriage. In Obergefell v Hodges, we can see the epitome of the Equal Protection Clause.
Students are guaranteed the right to pray, as long as it is not disruptive, and it is not promoted during classroom hours. Not only are these permitted, they are actually protected forms of speech under the U.
President Van Buren influenced the process and decided to refer the matter to the Supreme Court of the United States. At that time, the Supreme Court had been acknowledged as the highest court in America and had supreme rights in the interpretation of the country 's constitution. Therefore, their decision on the case was to be final, unquestionable and unchallenged. The president of the nation had the obligation of appointing the justices following the confirmation of the Senate. At the time, the court comprised of nine justices, including one chief justice and eight associate judges. The decision of the Supreme Court could only be overturned by another Supreme