constitutional law class 12 february 4, 2008 limits on federal legislative powers: the tenth...
TRANSCRIPT
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
CLASS 12February 4, 2008
Limits on Federal Legislative Powers: The Tenth Amendment
MODERN LAW: 3 THINGS CAN BE REGULATED UNDER THE
COMMERCE POWER• 1. Channels of interstate commerce (e.g.
roads, terms/conditions on which goods can be sold interstate)
• 2. Instrumentalities of interstate commerce (e.g airlines, railroads, trucking) and persons/things in intersatet commerce
• 3. any economic activity that has a substantial relationship with interstate commerce or substantially affects interstate commerce (read together with N & P clause)
The Tenth Amendment
• The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
ERA I: 1824-1890s Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) [C p. 113]
Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) (CB
• Justice Day wrote the majority opinion
• Powerful dissent by Justice Holmes (pictured left) (joined by McKenna, Brandeis, and Clarke
Zone of Activities
• In Era 2, Court accepts that a zone of activities is reserved to states by Tenth Amendment and this limits commerce power (dual sovereignty)
• This zone is not consistently defined?
ERA 3: 1937-1990s U.S. v. Darby (1941) [C p. 134]
• Justice Stone delivered opinion of the Court (unanimous)
• Tenth Amendment “states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered.”
Era 3: National League of Cities v. Usery (1976) [C p. 145]
• 5-4 Majority opinion written by Justice Rehnquist (joined by Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, and Powell)
• Concurring opinion by Blackmun
• Dissent by Brennan joined by White and Marshall
Era 3: Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority
(1985) [C p.148]• 5-4 overrules Usery• Justice Blackmun
wrote the majority opinion, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall, and Stevens
• Powell, Rehnquist, O’Connor, Burger dissent
Beginning of Tenth Amendment Era IV (Revival as a limit): Gregory v.
Ashcroft (1991) [C p. 176-177]• Sandra Day O’Connor
wrote for the Court (joined by Rehnquist, Scalia, Souter, Kennedy, and as for the judgment, White and Stevens)
• Blackmun, joined by Marshall, dissented
• Statutory construction case
• “Clear statement” rule
New York v. United States (1992) [C p. 177]
• Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court (joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Scalia)
• 6-3 decision• Dissenters: White,
Blackmun, Stevens
New York v. United States (1992) [C p. 177]
• Dissent of Justice White (joined by Blackmun and Stevens)
• For which professional football team(s) did “Whizzer” White play?
Printz v. United States (1997) [C p. 186]
• 5-4 decision• Scalia wrote
majority opinion (joined by Rehnquist, O’Connor, Kennedy, Thomas)
• Dissenters: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer
Printz v. United States (1997) [C p. 186]
• Concurring opinion of Thomas – he questions whether the Second Amendment confers an individual right
• Supreme Court will consider that issue in a challenge to DC handgun regulation, District of Columbia v. Heller – oral argument to be on 3/18/2008
Reno v. Condon (2000) [C p. 195]
• Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court
• Unanimous decision• How is this case
different, if at all, from Printz and New York?
Reno v. Condon (2000) [C p. 195]
• DPPA Act enacted after actress Rebecca Schaeffer (star of 1980s sitcom: My Sister Sam) was killed by a crazed fan who had obtained her home address from the CA DMV via an AZ private investigator)