Solution Manual for Constitutional Law: Governmental Powers and Individual Freedoms, 3rd Edition

Chapter 2 Dividing Governmental Power CHAPTER OVERVIEW Even though the framers wanted to increase the national government’s authority from its weak position under the Articles of Confederation, they did not want to centralize all governmental authority into one hand or into a small number of hands. Instead, they controlled authority through structure. First, they created a federation. Second, they further divided federal authority into three departments or branches. These authority divisions are not absolute, however. The federal and state governments often share jurisdiction, and the three branches of the federal government check each other. These additional features of the U.S. government are intended to protect the people against tyranny. The precise relationship between the federal and state governments is continually being redefined. The social, economic, and political circumstances of each case determine the legal outcome of any jurisdictional conflicts. The Supreme Court has vacillated between the dual and hierarchical federalism perspectives since the Constitution was enacted. There is no question, however, that the federal government has experienced enormous growth and increases in authority during the past two hundred years. Some of this can be attributed to population growth and the globalization of economic, travel, political, and social aspects of the world. Other factors, such as internal politics, have also contributed to the current federal scheme. As you will learn later, there was a shift on the Supreme Court during the Rehnquist years favoring limited federal authority and reinforcing state authority. The Roberts Court appears to be shifting its focus from the traditional state versus federal power questions that interested the Rehnquist Court to more complex federal preemption, legislative and administrative, of state laws. CHAPTER OBJECTIVES At the end of this chapter you should be able to: • Define federalism and separation of powers, identify the major sources of state and federal authorities explicit in the Constitution, and explain why the division of powers architecture was important to the framers. • Distinguish dual, hierarchical, and cooperative federalism, and from the last chapter, identify the various times the Supreme Court has favored dual or hierarchical federalism. • List ten or more examples of checks and balances among the three federal branches that are explicit in the Constitution. • Identify the most significant forms of federal and state laws. • Demonstrate comfort and familiarity with the style and format of judicial opinions. • Brief a judicial opinion with little outside assistance. You should be successful in identifying the relevant facts. You should be successful in identifying the legal issue and analyzing the court’s rationale in at least 33 percent of your briefs. LECTURE OUTLINE 2.1 Federalism 2.1(a) Dual, Hierarchical, and Cooperative Federalism 2.1(b) State and National Powers Compared 2.2 Separation of Powers • Teaching tip: When explaining to students how the separation of powers works, it is important to remind them that the reason behind separation of powers is so that one branch of government does not ever have all the power. Each branch is never allowed to perform the duties of the other branch, which is why there is a vice-president, a majority rule for Congress and the Court. This prevents the other branches from having to step in if someone is injured or unable to perform their duty. 2.3 Checks and Balances • Teaching tip: I have found the easiest way to help students understand the idea of why we have checks and balances is to give some examples. Even though we have separation of powers, there are exceptions such as: The President can veto a law, but remember that Congress can override that veto with 2/3 majority vote; The President can appoint Judges, but the Senate must approve them; Supreme Court Judges have life terms, but may be impeached, and Congress may pass laws, but the President can veto them. 2.4 Forms of State and Federal Law 2.5 Modern Challenges LIST OF CHANGES/TRANSITION GUIDE The law has been updated throughout the text ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENTS AND CLASS ACTIVITIES 1. With a diagram or a short essay, discuss the idea of “separation of powers” and if it is truly separate. Why or why not? 2. Brief a case that is listed in this chapter. Make sure you use the IRAC (Issue, Rule of Law, Analysis, Conclusion) format. You should keep case briefs to one page. ANSWERS TO END OF CHAPTER ASSIGNMENTS Review Questions 1. Federalism refers to the division of governmental power between two sovereigns, the federal and state governments. Separation of powers refers to the division of power into three branches, legislative, executive, and judicial. 2. To prevent tyranny. 3. Federal: coin money; provide for national defense; negotiate and make treaties; diplomacy; regulating interstate and foreign commerce; establishing a post office; taxing imports and exports; regulating naturalization of citizenship; regulating immigration and emigration; bankruptcy; etc. State: police powers; licensing of most trades and professions; regulating intrastate commerce; providing education Concurrent: taxing; eminent domain; crimes; constructing roads; borrowing money and establishing banks 4. Many possible answers, such as presidential veto, 2/3 vote overrides of presidential vetoes, Senate confirmation of presidential nominations of officers, Senate approval of treaties, etc. 5. Legislative: to make laws; Executive: to enforce laws; Judicial: to resolve disputes, interpret the law, and administer justice. Today, through judicial review, courts also preserve the balance of powers and protect individual rights. Constitutional Law in Action 1. Constitution in Your Community: Answers will vary depending on the jurisdiction. But students should be able to identify the constitutional or statutory authority for the zoning board within their community. 2. Going Federal: Students should demonstrate an understanding of the primary cases on the preemption doctrine and make an effective argument for/against the regulation of the construction industry. 3. Moot Court: Students should be able to identify some of the basic factual features of the debt debate and make coherent arguments as to whether the U.S. system of divided government was designed to achieve deliberate policy making or more efficient responses to social problems. Chapter 3 The Judiciary: Its Role and Jurisdiction CHAPTER OVERVIEW Although the framers intended for most cases to remain in the state courts, they also determined that a national judiciary was necessary to protect the newly formed national government from the states and, to a lesser degree, to protect individuals from the excesses of governments. The latter function has increased in importance as a result of the expansion of federal jurisdiction, particularly in the area of civil rights. Today, federal courts play an important role in checking states and state officials and generally in preserving individual liberties. The power of the federal courts is not, however, unbounded. Several formal institutional and informal limits exist to control the power of federal courts. In addition, even though federal jurisdiction has grown significantly in the past one hundred years, most judicial authority continues to reside in the states. Article III mandates the existence of only one federal court: the Supreme Court. But Article III grants Congress the power to establish other courts. The first Congress did this, and the federal judiciary has grown continuously since that time. Today, the Supreme Court sits at the judicial apex, with the courts of appeals directly below it. Below the appellate courts are the nation’s district courts. They are the federal trial courts. All district, appellate, and Supreme Court judges and justices are empowered under Article III. This means that they must undergo the presidential confirmation and senatorial confirmation process. Once sworn, an Article III judge receives the benefit of lifetime tenure and no reduction in salary. District courts have original jurisdiction over two classes of cases: diversity and federal question. Having only limited jurisdiction, these courts may not freely entertain state-law claims. The courts of appeals hear appeals from district courts and some administrative agencies and possess general appellate powers. The Supreme Court, pursuant to Article III, possesses both original and appellate jurisdiction. The high court’s original jurisdiction is limited to a narrow class of cases, such as those involving states. The Supreme Court most often acts as appellate court, hearing cases through appeal or certiorari. Appeals must be heard, whereas certiorari is discretionary. Although the power of the federal judiciary is significant, especially in regard to constitutional interpretation, it is limited in many respects. Most cases continue to be litigated in state courts, and the federal courts themselves have created a number of limitations (e.g., abstention) on their power. Congress exercises considerable power over federal courts through its powers to create lower federal courts and to define judicial jurisdiction. Congress may not enlarge the judicial power beyond that provided for in Article III; thus, only genuine controversies may be heard. Interpretation of the Constitution, legislation, and agency rules is a function all judges perform. There are as many methods of interpretation as there are judges. Regardless, most constructions can be classified as primarily originalist, modernist, literalist, or normative. The Constitution is silent as to whether the framers’ intentions are to be followed, and there is no other concrete evidence in the matter. In reality, most judges treat the Constitution as a living document, while adhering to the plain-meaning rule or original intent when the outcome is clear and obvious. CHAPTER OBJECTIVES At the end of this chapter you should be able to: • Outline the structure of the federal court system, as defined by the Constitution and statute. • Explain the appointment and removal processes for federal judges, both Article III and other; discuss the formal and informal constraints on judges and courts; and explain the role and responsibilities of courts in the United States. • Explain the jurisdictions of federal and state courts, including the application of federal and state laws by both. • Explain the jurisdiction of federal courts in detail, including the various limitations on federal judicial jurisdiction. • Identify, compare, and contrast the four primary methods of interpreting the Constitution. • Identify and explain three canons of construction. • Define and explain stare decisis and its application by the Supreme Court and lower courts. • Identify and discuss a contemporary issue concerning federal court jurisdiction. • Demonstrate comfort with reading judicial opinions. • Brief a judicial opinion with little outside assistance. You should be successful in identifying the relevant facts. You should be successful in identifying the legal issue and analyzing the court’s rationale in at least 33 percent of your briefs. • Apply, with assistance, what you have learned to a new set of facts that are given to you. LECTURE OUTLINE 3.1 The Federal Court System 3.2 Federal Judges 3.3 Formal and Informal Controls on the Federal Judiciary 3.3(a) Formal Constraints 3.3(b) Informal Constraints 3.4 The Role of the Federal Judiciary 3.5 Federal Judicial Jurisdiction 3.5(a) Case-or-Controversy Requirement Nashville, Cincinnati, St. Louis 3.5(b) Federal Question and Diversity Jurisdiction Grable & Sons v. Darue Engineering • Teaching tip: When explaining diversity jurisdiction for federal court, I always say to imagine that you are on vacation and you are far away from home and involved in a massive accident. You are not at fault and have a valid lawsuit against the person who hit you who is from a totally different state far away. Now, it would simply not be practical for you to have to file suit in their state for your lawsuit. If the amount in controversy is met, you would be able to bring the lawsuit in federal court for your convenience since it satisfies the diversity of citizenship requirement. 3.5(c) Pendent Jurisdiction, Removal, and Other Practice Issues 3.5(d) Supreme Court Jurisdiction Ex Parte McCardle United States v. Klein 3.5(e) Lower Courts’ Jurisdictions 3.6 Limitations on Federal Judicial Power 3.6(a) Ripeness and Mootness 3.6(b) Standing Sierra Club v. Morton Allen v. Wright Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow Hollingsworth v. Perry Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus 3.6(c) Political Questions Tenet v. Doe Nixon v. United States 3.6(d) Abstention 3.6(e) Sovereign Immunity and the Eleventh Amendment Atascadero State Hospital v. Scanlon Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland 3.6(f) Other Limitations 3.7 State Court Jurisdiction • Teaching tip: when looking at a decision from the highest state court for state law issues, the only way it can be appealed to the Federal Supreme Court is if the highest state court relied on federal law when making its decision. If they only based it on state law, then it may not be appealed to The Supreme Court. 3.8 Constitutional Interpretation 3.8(a) Originalism 3.8(b) Modernism 3.8(c) Historical and Contemporary Literalism 3.8(d) Democratic Reinforcement 3.8(e) The Interpretation Process 3.8(f) Stare Decisis, Canons, and Practices Affecting Interpretation 3.8(g) Political Values and Judicial Decisions 3.9 Modern Challenges LIST OF CHANGES/TRANSITION GUIDE The Supreme Court’s standing decisions in Hollingsworth v. Perry and Susan B. Anthony v. Driehaus have been added ADDITIONAL ASSIGNMENTS AND CLASS ACTIVITIES 1. Based on your state, research which district court you would file a federal case in, where it is located in your state, and how many justices are currently serving on that court. 2. Following the first question, give a specific case that you could file directly in federal court and describe why it would be filed there instead of in a state court. ANSWERS TO END OF CHAPTER ASSIGNMENTS Review Questions 1. The court is not majoritarian because it is not democratic in structure. Its members are not elected, they are appointed. Even more, there is little review of their actions. Other than death and retirement, impeachment is the only way to remove an Article III judge. 2. The Court is responsible for resolving disputes, administering justice, interpreting the law, protecting civil liberties, and preserving the balance of governmental powers. 3. The Supreme Court sits at the apex of the federal judiciary. This court was created directly by the Constitution. Under the Supreme Court are the United States Courts of Appeals. There are thirteen Courts of Appeals. These courts were created by Congress. Under the Courts of Appeals are the United States district courts. There is at least one district court in each state and there are more in larger states. These courts were created by Congress. Under the district courts are bankruptcy courts and magistrate-judges. In addition, Congress has created several specialty courts. 4. Originalism attempts to discover what the Framer’s intended for the Constitution to mean. Modernists view the Constitution in light of contemporary life. The Constitution is a living document to a modernist. Literalists attempt to confine interpretation to the text of the document. Those in the historical school use the definitions and language rules of the time when the Constitution was formed (or amendment adopted). Contemporary literalists use today’s definitions and rules. 5. Let the decision stand. It is a requirement that lower courts follow precedent. A case must be substantially similar in facts before it is binding precedent. A case that can be distinguished on the facts is not binding, although its rationale may be persuasive. 6. If it is possible to do without disturbing the substance of a statute, the unconstitutional portion is to be severed and the remainder left intact. 7. An order from a higher tribunal to a lower one requiring it to transmit a file for review. The Supreme Court reviews most cases through certiorari, which is discretionary. 8. Several possible answers: limiting jurisdiction and size of the court; reversing decisions through legislation or amendment; in rare cases, impeachment; confirmation of judges/justices 9. Article III. 10. Through Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court established the power of judicial review. 11. Diversity and federal question. 12. Some issues are more political than legal, and accordingly, are left to the political branches of government. Federal courts will deny jurisdiction in such cases. 13. Federal courts abstain from becoming involved in state proceedings in most instances. The Younger Doctrine provides that federal courts are not to intervene in state proceedings, regardless of pending federal constitutional issues, unless there is a threat to the defendant of immediate and great irreparable harm. 14. Standing refers to the right to appear in court or raise an issue within litigation. Generally, a party must show an injury in fact and causation to have standing. 15. Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, state and federal governments cannot be held liable for their actions. The Eleventh Amendment enshrines this doctrine for the states. It provides that states cannot be sued in federal court by their own citizens, citizens of other states, or citizens of foreign nations. 16. The three categories are: unsettled principles of state law, subjects traditionally left to the states, and when comity demands. The student may also identify specific doctrines, such as political question. 17. Federal courts may hear only those cases allowed to them by the Constitution. State courts have a general power to hear all cases, with few exceptions. Constitutional Law in Action 1. The Constitution in Your Community: Answers will vary depending on the state. But generally, students should identify the primary mechanism(s) in their state’s constitution for removing officials. 2. Going Federal: Answers will vary depending on the judge selected. 3. Moot Court: Answers will vary. But generally students should be able to defend/challenge their view of interest groups taking on the role of defender of the state’s interests.