Simone Lawson
The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in interpreting the Constitution and resolving constitutional issues that arise in various cases. One of the Court's essential functions is to ensure that each branch of the government respects its limits and does not overstep its authority. This power of judicial review allows the Court to strike down laws that violate the Constitution, protecting civil rights and liberties. The Court's decisions have had a profound impact on society, with landmark cases such as Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland, Dred Scott v. Sandford, Brown v. Board of Education, and many others shaping the understanding of constitutional rights and the balance of power between the federal government and the states. These cases often involve significant constitutional questions, such as the division of powers, civil rights, due process, freedom of speech, and privacy. The Supreme Court's rulings on these issues have helped define the rights and freedoms enjoyed by Americans today.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Article III, Section II of the Constitution establishes the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court |
| Original jurisdiction | Cases between two or more states, cases involving ambassadors and other public ministers |
| Appellate jurisdiction | Almost any other case involving a point of constitutional and/or federal law |
| Power of judicial review | Ensures each branch of government recognizes the limits of its power |
| Protection of civil rights and liberties | Strikes down laws that violate the Constitution |
| Limits on democratic government | Ensures popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm minorities |
| Constitutional issues | Whether an Act of Congress or the Constitution was the supreme law of the land |
| Constitutional issues | Whether Congress had the power to prohibit slavery in free territories |
| Constitutional issues | Whether African Americans had the right to sue in federal court |
| Constitutional issues | Whether students can be barred from wearing black armbands to symbolize anti-war political protest |
| Constitutional issues | Whether laws severely restricting or denying a woman's access to abortion are prohibited by the Constitution |
| Constitutional issues | Whether institutions of higher learning can use race as a factor when making admissions decisions |
| Constitutional issues | Whether states must create more fairly representative districts at the federal, state, and local levels |
| Constitutional issues | Whether Congress has implied powers to establish a national bank |
| Constitutional issues | Whether the federal government holds sovereign power over states |
| Constitutional issues | Whether the President can infringe on constitutional property rights |
Explore related products
![Constitutional Law: Cases in Context [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook Series)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61EiA9gIIGL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
What You'll Learn
Does the Federal Government hold sovereign power over states?
The concept of sovereignty refers to holding supreme, independent authority over a region or state. In the context of the United States, the federal government possesses absolute sovereignty within its borders, but it also recognises the existence of other political units such as states, counties, cities, and towns, each with varying degrees of sovereignty.
The Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution reserves specific powers for the states, provided they have not been delegated to the federal government. These reserved powers include creating school systems, overseeing state courts, establishing public safety systems, managing intrastate business and trade, and governing local municipalities. States also possess "police power," which grants them the authority to legislate on matters within their territorial jurisdiction, although this power is limited by the Constitution in certain areas, such as foreign affairs and interstate commerce.
The federal government, on the other hand, holds sovereignty in areas such as foreign affairs, interstate commerce, and certain appointments, as outlined in the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution. The federal government also shares concurrent powers with the states, such as the power to tax, build roads, and create lower courts. The interplay between state and federal courts is complex, with both systems having exclusive jurisdiction in some areas and concurrent jurisdiction in others.
The relationship between the federal government and Native American tribes is also worth noting. Native American tribes possess a form of divided sovereignty, recognised by the federal government. The Supreme Court case Worcester v. Georgia affirmed that tribes are considered "domestic dependent nations," operating as sovereign governments subject to federal authority but sometimes outside the jurisdiction of individual state governments.
In conclusion, while the federal government of the United States holds absolute sovereignty over the nation as a whole, it shares power with the states through the Tenth Amendment and recognises the sovereignty of Native American tribes. The specific powers delegated to the federal government and those reserved for the states contribute to a complex system of federalism in the United States.
McCulloch v Maryland: The Constitutional Clause Explained
You may want to see also
Can students use prayer during school-led activities?
The topic of prayer in US public schools is a complex and controversial issue that has been the subject of much debate and litigation. The constitutional issue at the heart of this debate centres on the First Amendment, specifically the Establishment Clause, the Free Exercise Clause, and the Free Speech Clause. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from establishing an official religion or favouring one religion over another. This clause has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to mean that school-sponsored prayer, or prayer led by school officials acting in their official capacity, is unconstitutional. This includes inviting religious leaders to deliver prayers at school events, such as graduation ceremonies, as this could be seen as coercive and effectively force students to choose between praying or openly opposing the prayer.
However, the Free Exercise Clause and the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment protect the right of students to engage in voluntary, private prayer during school hours. Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction, and they may also read religious texts and engage in religious worship or study during non-instructional time, such as lunch or recess. School authorities may not discriminate against student religious groups in terms of advertising or announcing their meetings and may not discourage private prayer or religious activity. At the same time, they must also not promote or favour religion or coerce students to pray.
The Supreme Court has also upheld the concept of a "moment of silence" or "moment of reflection" in schools, during which students may choose to pray silently, as a valid application of the Free Exercise Clause. However, if the moment of silence is intended to be a devotional activity, it would violate the Establishment Clause.
While the Supreme Court has provided guidance on these issues, the application of these principles in specific contexts can be complex and has been the subject of ongoing litigation.
Violent Crime Charges in Pennsylvania: What You Need to Know
You may want to see also
Does the First Amendment protect students' freedom of speech?
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified on December 15, 1791, protects the right to free speech. It states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech..." This right is not absolute, however, and there are certain limitations and considerations, especially in educational institutions.
Students in public schools do not lose their First Amendment rights when they enter the school premises. The Supreme Court has affirmed that students have the right to express their beliefs and engage in free speech and expression. This includes the right to speak out, distribute flyers and petitions, and wear clothing that expresses their views. However, these rights are not unlimited and can be restricted if they substantially disrupt the functioning of the school or violate content-neutral policies. Schools can also regulate and control student conduct within constitutional boundaries. For example, in the case of *Tinker v. Des Moines*, the Supreme Court upheld the school's decision to suspend a student for giving a speech containing sexual innuendos, deeming it inconsistent with the "fundamental values of public school education."
The level of protection for student speech varies depending on the educational level and the nature of the institution. Students in institutions of higher education, particularly those over 18 years old, generally have more academic freedom than secondary school students. Professors and educators also have varying degrees of protection for their speech depending on whether they are in the classroom or engaged in official duties. When speaking as private citizens on matters of public interest, their speech may be restricted if it is deemed too disruptive.
In conclusion, the First Amendment does protect students' freedom of speech, but this protection is not absolute. Students' rights may be balanced with the objectives of the educational system and the need to maintain a safe and orderly learning environment. The specific circumstances, nature of the speech, and educational context all play a role in determining the extent of First Amendment protection in schools.
Interpreting the Constitution: Democratic Republicans' Vision
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Does the Constitution prohibit abortion restrictions?
The U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973 effectively legalized abortion in the United States. The ruling established the constitutional protection of abortion access, asserting that the Constitution safeguards an individual's right to make private medical decisions, including the decision to have an abortion before fetal viability. This precedent was reaffirmed in subsequent cases, including Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey and Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt.
However, the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization on June 24, 2022, overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating the federal constitutional right to abortion. The Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization pertained to a Mississippi law banning abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The Court's decision effectively ended nearly five decades of federal constitutional protection for abortion rights, allowing states to implement their own abortion restrictions.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has resulted in a wave of abortion bans and restrictions across the country. As of June 2022, 18 states have banned or severely restricted abortion access, and more states are working towards passing similar bans. The loss of federal constitutional protection for abortion rights has disproportionately impacted marginalized communities, including Black, Latino, Indigenous, and other communities of color, exacerbating existing barriers to healthcare access.
While the Supreme Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has significantly altered the legal landscape surrounding abortion rights, some state courts are taking steps to protect abortion access within their respective states. State courts in Florida, Arizona, and Kentucky are facing retention elections and ballot initiatives that could shape abortion access within their jurisdictions. Additionally, Montana voters will consider an abortion-rights measure, signaling their commitment to safeguarding reproductive rights.
In conclusion, while the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has eliminated the federal constitutional protection for abortion rights, the ongoing efforts of state courts and voters demonstrate a continued commitment to protecting abortion access. The dynamic legal landscape surrounding abortion rights underscores the ongoing struggle to balance individual freedoms and government interests in a rapidly evolving societal context.
Capital Punishment: Unconstitutional and Unjust
You may want to see also
Can race be used as a factor in admissions decisions?
The use of race as a factor in college admissions has been a contentious issue in the United States for decades. The Supreme Court's recent decision in June 2023 has ended the use of race as a factor in college admissions, overturning its previous precedent set in Grutter v. Bollinger. The Court's ruling applies to both public and private not-for-profit institutions that offer bachelor's degrees and higher credentials.
The decision was made in the cases of Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. (SFFA) v. University of North Carolina and SFFA v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. The Court held that the admissions programs at these universities violated the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The Court found that the programs lacked focused and measurable objectives to warrant the use of race, employed race in a negative manner, involved racial stereotyping, and lacked meaningful endpoints.
The ruling has significant implications for selective college admissions programs and diversity initiatives. While colleges are no longer allowed to use race as a factor in admissions decisions, they can still pursue a racially diverse student body through race-neutral means. For example, colleges can increase outreach in communities of colour and rural areas, go test-optional, focus on student recruitment in specific areas, and allocate more aid to need-based grants. Additionally, students can continue to reference their racial and ethnic identities in college essays and interviews, and colleges can consider these experiences during application review, as long as they are tied to individual, non-racial characteristics.
The Supreme Court's decision has been met with mixed reactions. While 68% of Americans in a Gallup Center survey considered it "mostly a good thing", half of Black adults believed it would negatively impact higher education in the US. Critics argue that the ruling will hinder efforts to achieve racial diversity in colleges and further delay the goal of becoming truly colour-blind as a nation.
The Constitution: A People's Power Pact
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The constitutional issue involved in this case was whether the Federal Government held sovereign power over states. The case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, which sparked the broader issue of the division of powers between state and federal governments.
The constitutional issue involved in this case was whether Congress had the power to prohibit slavery in free territories. The Court answered no, concluding that slaves were "property" and therefore could not be taken from their owners without due process.
The constitutional issue involved in this case was whether the First Amendment prohibits public school officials from barring students from wearing black armbands to symbolize anti-war political protest. The Court held that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech...at the schoolhouse gate."
