Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/LINDSYCO2014.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 22:34:40+00:00

Document:
There is no required casebook. For students with strong interests in constitutional law, a suggested reference for this course (as well as for Constitutional Law II and First Amendment Law) is Constitutional Law (8th Ed., 2010) by Nowak and Rotunda. Nowak's and Rotunda's book is a traditional hornbook in the West series.
Our first discussion will be based on the page, "INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW." Read the Constitution. Identify those provisions, if any, that confer power on: (1) the federal government, (2) the states, and (3) private individuals. Identify those provisions, if any, that limit the power of: (1) the federal government, (2) the states, and (3) private individuals. Are there provisions that seem to have little to do with issues of power? What are the purposes of the provisions unrelated to power allocation? Based on the text and structure of the Constitution, what seem to be its primary purposes?
Our discussion will be based on the page, THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1787. Read "A More Perfect Union: The Creation of the U. S. Constitution" at the Library of Congress website. The account can be accessed by clicking on the appropriate link (note that the essay includes several linked pages). You also might wish to read "The 200th Reunion of Delegates to the Constitutional Convention" (this piece need not be read for detail). You should also spend some time exploring the other links posted on the page. Be ready to discuss the following questions: Why was a Constitutional Convention necessary? Who were the delegates? What sorts of interests did they represent? What were some of the critical compromises reached in Philadelphia? What major issues were left unresolved?
We will also in this session to consider the role of the United States Supreme Court in American government. Read materials on the SUPREME COURT IN THE AMERICAN SYSTEM page. We will discuss how the Court decides what cases to take, and how it decides the ones that it does accept. We will discuss the cert process, the briefing process, oral argument, Supreme Court conferences, and the preparation and significance of majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions. We will also discuss briefly the make-up of the current Supreme Court and the process of nominating and confirming Supreme Court justices.
Read the POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW page on the website, including the case that will be the primary focus of our discussion, Marbury v. Madison. Also read the THEORIES OF CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION page, including the cases of Marsh v Chambers and Griswold v Connecticut.
On the page CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE JUDICIAL POWER, read and be prepared to discuss the following cases relating to standing: Sierra Club v Morton, United States v SCRAP, Lujan v Defenders of Wildlife, and Massachusetts v EPA.
On the page CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE JUDICIAL POWER, read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Michigan v Long, Roe v Wade, DeFunis v Odegaard, Poe v Ullman, and Epperson v Arkansas.
Please read materials on THE NECESSARY AND PROPER CLAUSE. Read and be prepared to answer questions concerning the following cases: McCullough v Maryland, U. S. v Gettysburg Electric Co., and U. S. v Comstock.
On the page FEDERAL COMMERCE POWER, read and be prepared to answer questions concerning the following cases: Gibbons v Ogden, Wickard v Filburn, Heart of Atlanta Motel v U. S., Katzenbach v McClung, and Gonzales v Raich.
On the page FEDERAL COMMERCE POWER, read and be prepared to answer questions concerning the following cases: U. S. v Lopez and U. S. v Morrison, and National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius (commerce power holding).
On the page FEDERAL POWERS TO TAX AND TO SPEND, read and be prepared to answer questions concerning the following cases: U. S. v Kahriger, National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius (tax power holding), South Dakota v Dole, National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius (spending power holding), and Kleppe v New Mexico.
On the page PRESIDENTIAL POWERS: AN INTRODUCTION, read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Youngstown Sheet & Tube v Sawyer and Dames and Moore v Regan. On the page WAR AND TREATY POWERS, read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Ex Parte Milligan and Ex Parte Quirin.
On the page SEPARATION OF POWERS, read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: INS v Chadha, Morrison v Olson, United States v Nixon, and Clinton v Jones.
Read the introductory note and consider the questions on the page THE QUESTION OF STATE'S RIGHTS: THE CONSTITUTION AND AMERICAN FEDERALISM (AN INTRODUCTION). On the page TENTH AMENDMENT LIMITATIONS ON FEDERAL POWER, please read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Garcia v San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, New York v United States, Printz v United States, and Shelby County v Holder.
On the page THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE AND FEDERAL PREEMPTION, please read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Cooper v Aaron, Silkwood v Kerr-McGee Corporation, Cipollone v Liggett Group, and Arizona v Arizona Inter Tribal Council.
On the page COMMERCE CLAUSE LIMITATIONS ON STATE REGULATION, please read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Cooley v Board of Wardens, Edwards v California, and Philadelphia v New Jersey, Hughes v Oklahoma, Maine v Taylor, Hunt v Washington State Apple Advertising Commission, Granholm v Heald, Southern Pacific Co. v Arizona, and United Haulers v Oneida-Herkimer.
On the page COMMERCE CLAUSE LIMITATIONS ON STATE REGULATION, please read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Reeves v. Stake and South-Central Timber Development v Wunnicke.
On the page STATE DISCRIMINATION AGAINST NON-RESIDENTS, please read and be prepared to discuss the following cases: Baldwin v Montana Fish and Game Comm'n, Hicklin v Orbeck, and Supreme Court of New Hampshire v Piper.
Read materials on the INTRODUCTION TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS to the adoption of the Bill of Rights. What were the principal objections of the Anti-Federalists to the Constitution? How were those objections countered? Compare Madison's original proposal for a Bill of Rights with the amendments actually adopted. Examine the debates in the House and Senate concerning the proposed Bill of Rights. What were the principal arguments for and against adoption of the Bill of Rights? Think about the questions asked on the website and read Barron v Baltimore.
Read the INCORPORATION DEBATE page on the website, including the cases we will discuss: Adamson v. California, Duncan v. Louisiana, and McDonald v Chicago.
Read the STUDENT SEARCHES page on the website. Our principal cases will be New Jersey v. T.L.O. , Safford School District v Redding, Acton v. Veronia, and Bd. of Education v Earls.
TOPIC 19: Substantive Due Process--Is There a Liberty of Contract?
Read the LIBERTY OF CONTRACT page on the website. Our principal cases will be Lochner v New York, Nebbia v New York, and Williamson v Lee Optical.
Read the RIGHT TO PRIVACY page on the website. Our principal cases will be Griswold v Connecticut, Ravin v State, Kelley v Johnson, Lawrence v Texas, and Cruzan v Missouri Department of Health.
Read the RIGHT TO ABORTIONS page on the website. Our principal cases will be Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey.
Read the LEVELS OF SCRUTINY UNDER THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE page on the website. Our principal cases will be Railway Express v New York, Kotch v River Port Pilot Commissioners, Skinner v Oklahoma, Korematsu v United States, and Loving v Virginia.
Read the SEPERATE BUT EQUAL EDUCATION page on the website. Our principal cases will be Plessy v Ferguson, Missouri ex rel. Gaines v Canada, Brown v Board of Education, Brown v Board of Education (II), and Griffin v School Board of Prince Edward County.
Read the PROVING UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISCRIMINATION page on the website. Our prinicipal cases will be Yick Wo v Hopkins, Washington v Davis, and Arlington Heights v Metropolitan Housing Authority.
Read the THE ORIGINS OF THE INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY TEST page on the website. Our principal cases will be Craig v Boren and Michael M v Superior Court.
Read the GENDER EQUALITY IN THE SCHOOLS page on the website. Our principal cases will be Mississippi Univ. for Women v Hogan and United States v Virginia.
Read the AFFIRMATIVE ACTION page on the website. Our principal cases will be Grutter v Bollinger, Parents Involved v Seattle, and Richmond v J. R. Croson, and Fisher v Texas. You should skim Regents of the University of California v Bakke.
TOPIC 28: The Rational Basis Test "with Bite"
Read the SHOULD THE RATIONAL BASIS TEST HAVE BITE? page on the website. Our principal cases will be Plyler v Doe, Cleburne v Cleburne Living Center, and Romer v Evans.
Read EQUAL PROTECTION AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS (just the introduction, not the cases) and the EQUAL PROTECTION AND THE RIGHT TO VOTE page on the website. Our principal cases will be Kramer v Union Free School District, Bush v Gore, and Crawford v Marion County Election Board.
Read the PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS page on the website. Our principal cases will be Board v Roth, Wisconsin v Constantineau, Paul v Davis, Vitek v Jones, Mackey v Montrym, Cleveland Board of Ed. v Loudermill, Goss v Lopez, and Board of Curators of the University of Missouri v Horowitz.
Read the RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AND THE STATE ACTION REQUIREMENT page on the website. Our principal cases will be Evans v Newton, Evans v Abney, Shelley v Kraemer, Burton v Wilmington, Moose Lodge v Irvin, and Edmonson v Leesville Concrete.
Read the GOVERNMENT'S DUTY TO PROTECT LIVES page on the website. Our principal cases will be DeShaney v Winnebago Dep't of Social Services and Castle Rock v Gonzales.
Review: See TOPICS FOR STUDY on the website. You should also look at SAMPLE EXAMS and SAMPLE MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.