when we want the court to give some decree, actions that authorize court to dispositively resolve controversies before it goes further
challenged by nashville v. wallace
more justiciability.
prudential doctrine. the issue hasn't become timely because the events are being anticipated, and may not occur.
another prudential/ fact based doctrine. there's nothing more to litigate because the issue is no longer a legal issue.
exceptions to mootness can be shaped by the plaintiff's pleading.
go here for interesting essay on mootness by matthew hall.
back to 10th amendment: why states?
n.b. -- consider the tenth amendment movement and the oklahoma senate plan to not follow no child left behind act...
necessary and proper: a gloss that gives other federal ends clout
if the court is pursuing anything in the constitution, then it just needs to be rational and
for the exam: talk first about the rule and threshold question of what rule is being used, and then the most updated application from sabri v. US: "
if the court is pursuing anything in the constitution, then it just needs to be rational and
for the exam: talk first about the rule and threshold question of what rule is being used, and then the most updated application from sabri v. US: "
mccullough v. maryland marshall did not see the constitution as a contract between sovereign states
the threshold question: by what power can the nat'l gov't create a bank? what power is being used?
"necessary and proper" art I, s. 8, c. 18 powers, but the power to create a bank is not freestanding.
congress doesn't have total authority, but instead can do what is necessary to regulate interstate commerce.... is this just a redundancy? the us amends the clause to read just "necessary and proper" instead of absolutely
where the constitution is silent on the state's power to act, the state is presumed to have the power to act.
mccullough part II.
can states tax the gov't?
the federal gov't has sovergniety.
why constitution vs a legal code type mechanism? b/c a constitution encourages longevity...
thorton was a senator and AK had a law of congressional term limits that were different from US congressional term limits.
thorton and AK get the authority to bring this suit under the 10th amd't.
thorton and AK get the authority to bring this suit under the 10th amd't.
stevens: (maj.) "the 10th amd't can't preserve what didn't exist before." the states have their original powers and originally ratified powers (before they give the nat'l gov't the federal powers under the constitution), but cannot ratify to add new powers now.
kennedy: (conc.) "uniformity and nat'l character that the framers meant to ensure" by "splitting the atom of sovereignty" between the state and federal for the citizens
thomas and scalia: (diss) the dissent says that there is nothing in the constitution that deprives the people of AK of the power to enact such measures.
congress regulates interstate commerce too, via the commerce clause, and the dormant commerce clause.
No comments:
Post a Comment