Study sets, textbooks, questions
Upgrade to remove ads
Terms in this set (34)
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. holding
Congressional income tax is unconstitutional because it is a direct tax which can occur only after a census
*Decision overturned by 16th Amendment
tax paid by individuals, must occur after a census
Article 1, Section 8
gives Congress power to "law and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States"
taxation over imports
"collect duties and imposts," primary source of federal revenue at adoption
target the manufacture, sale or use of goods or services domestically
McCray v. US holding
The Oleomargarine Act is constitutional because Congress levied a valid excise tax under the taxing and spending clause
Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co. holding
The Child Labor Tax Law is unconstitutional because Congress cannot regulate manufacturing by assessing a financial penalty. (Difference from McCray is that that case was an actual excise tax, not just an attempt to regulate manufacturing)
United States v. Butler holding
Part of the Agricultural Adjustment Act imposing a tax on farmers is unconstitutional because Congress must spend revenue for the general welfare, not for a specific group (issue not with taxing, but with spending)
South Dakota v. Dole holding
Attachment of minimum drinking age to federal highway funds is not unconstitutional because Congress may attach specific policy requirements for receipt of federal money
voluntary agreement between two or more parties in which a promise is made and something of value is given or pledged in return
Fletcher v. Peck holding
State law rescinding land grants is unconstitutional because it impairs the obligation of contracts
Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward holding
State statute changing Dartmouth College is unconstitutional because it violates the obligation of contract
Charles River Bridge Co. v. Warren Bridge Co.
State law incorporating a second bridge company is constitutional because it does not violate the original contract
Implications of Charles River Bridge Co. decision
contracts viewed according to the letter of the document**, interpretations based on the spirit or intent of the document come later
Home Building and Loan Association v. Blaisdell
State statute is constitutional because times of emergency allow governments to alter application of contracts without violating the contract clause
procedural due process
focuses on whether individuals were treated fairly in the administration of justice
substantive due process
invoked when government unreasonably or arbitrarily denies rights that are inherent in the freedom of the individual, lasted from 1905-1955, comes from 5th and 14th Amendments
The Slaughterhouse Cases holding
State statute creating monopoly is constitutional because of state police power and does not violate 14th amendment
Munn v. Illinois holding
State statute regulating grain storage prices is constitutional because states can regulate private property if it is used for the public good
liberty to contract
found in due process clause of 14th Amendment- "No state can deprive life, liberty, or property without due process of law"
*not the same as the contract clause
Lochner v. New York holding
State law regulating work schedules in bakeries is unconstitutional because it violates the liberty to contract
Muller v. Oregon holding
State law is constitutional because the state may pass legislation designed to protect women from harsh employment conditions.
Comes from Muller v. Oregon, Louis Brandeis argued in defense of the state law placing limits on working hours for female employees. Brief contained 113 pages of scientific data and two pages of legal argument
Adkins v. Children's Hospital holding
Congressional statute is unconstitutional because it violates women's liberty to contract
(passage of 19th Amendment changes climate, places women on "equal" footing with men)
Nebbia v. New York holding
State law regulating price of milk is constitutional and does not violate substantive due process
West Coast Hotel v. Parrish
State statute establishing minimum wage is constitutional because individuals do not possess a liberty to contract. Adkins v. Children's Hospital is overturned.
Williamson v. Lee Optical Co.
State statute regulating eye care is constitutional. The Court abandons substantive due process.
legal authority of the government to seize private property for public use
5th Amendment- "nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation," later applied to states in 14th Amendment
US v. Causby holding
Government operation of nearby airfield amounts to a taking of private property. Causbys are therefore entitled to just compensation.
Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York holding
New York Historic Landmark statute is constitutional and does not constitute a taking of private property.
Berman v. Parker holding
DC Redevelopment Act is constitutional because condemnation of property, with just compensation, is designed to promote the public welfare
Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff
Hawaii Land Reform Act is constitutional because the redistribution of land considered in favor of public use
Kelo v. City of New London
New London's economic development plan is constitutional because economic revitalization is considered 'public use'
Sets with similar terms
PSC 2302 Block Final Baylor
Exam 2 - PSC 2302 (Steve Block, Baylor)
Constitutional Law Quiz 5
PS 485 Midterm