Supreme Court Decisions 1803 - 1944

Marbury v. Madison (1803) Background Constitutional Issue “Midnight Judge” Marbury asked Supreme Court to order Madison to deliver his commission as a federal judge (according to the Judiciary Act of 1789) Constitutional Issue The Judiciary Act of 1789 added the power of the writ of mandamus to the original powers in the Constitution

Marbury v. Madison Decision Importance Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional because it added instances of original jurisdiction for the Supreme Court that were not in the Constitution Importance Supreme Court established the precedent of JUDICIAL REVIEW – the power of the court to declare a law unconstitutional

Fletcher v. Peck (1810) Background: Georgia legislature was involved in a fraudulent land deal. A new legislature revoked the sale of the land. Mr. Peck bought land from original company and sold it to Mr. Fletcher. Mr. Fletcher wanted his contract with Mr. Peck to be declared null & void and his money returned because Mr. Peck did not have clear title to the land when it was sold.

(Fletcher v. Peck) Issue: Decision Can a contract be invalidated by a new law passed by the legislature? Decision Original land grant was valid even though the legislature was corrupt. Cannot cancel the sale ex post facto

(Fletcher v. Peck) Importance: States cannot pass a law impairing the terms of a contract Supreme Court declared a state law unconstitutional

Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) Background In Colonial days, Dartmouth was chartered as a private college run by a board of trustees In 1816, the State of New Hampshire passed a law converting it to a state-run college without the consent of the college board of trustees Constitutional Issue Did the N.H. law violate the Constitutional provisions protecting private property and the sanctity of contracts?

Dartmouth College v. Woodward Decision Actions of N.H. legislature were unconstitutional. The charter was considered to be a contract and could not be broken by the state Importance Supreme Court reversed the decision of the state court. It guaranteed the protection of contracts from government actions, and defined a corporation as an “artificial being”.

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Background Maryland imposed a tax on the Bank of the US branch office in Maryland in an attempt to force the BUS out of business in Maryland Constitutional Issue Was the BUS properly created through the use of the elastic clause? Can the state tax a federal agency like the BUS?

McCulloch v. Maryland Decision Importance Upheld the Constitutionality of the BUS Ruled the states cannot tax the federal government because “the power to tax is the power to destroy” Importance ↑ power of the national gov’t through use of elastic clause Limited power of states

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) Background Constitutional Issue 2 men operating competing steamboats in the waters between NY & NJ Ogden – exclusive license by NY Gibbons – license from federal gov’t Constitutional Issue Could NY authorize exclusive rights to the waters between NY & NJ?

Gibbons v. Ogden Decision Importance Operation of steamboats was interstate commerce; Congress, not states, regulates interstate commerce Importance Defined interstate commerce to include transportation (eventually railroads, airlines, trucking companies) Expanded role of federal gov’t

Worcester v. Georgia (1832) Background Constitutional Issue 2 missionaries refused to obey the Georgia law requiring all whites living in Cherokee territory to obtain a license. Missionaries were sentenced to 4 years hard labor for violating the state law Constitutional Issue Can the state pass laws concerning the Indian Nations or are the Indian Nations sovereign?

Worcester v. Georgia Decision Importance The state has no power to pass any laws affecting the Cherokees because it was federal jurisdiction Importance Established tribal autonomy within their boundaries Pres. Jackson disagreed, refused to enforce; Cherokees won case but lost land (“Trail of Tears”)

Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Background Constitutional Issue Dred Scott, slave, taken into free territory by owner, then returned to slave territory. Scott sued owner believing that his presence in free territory made him a free man Constitutional Issue Was Dred Scott a citizen & legally entitled to use courts? Did his presence in a free territory make him a free man?

Dred Scott v. Sanford Decision Importance Slave defined as property, not citizen. Freeing him would be violation of 5th Amendment due process Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because designating “free territory” could deprive an owner of his “property” Importance Step closer to Civil War (Congress can’t legislate, Presidents unwilling to intervene, now Court refused to free Dred Scott & thousands in same situation)

Civil Rights Cases (1883) Background Constitutional Issue Civil Rights Act in 1875 declared it a crime to deny equal access to public accommodations on account of race or color. Most privately owned businesses continued to deny service to African American customers. Constitutional Issue Could the U.S. government establish laws banning discrimination in privately owned businesses?

Civil Rights Cases Decision Importance The Civil Rights Act of 1875 was unconstitutional because the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause applied to the discriminatory acts taken by states, not by individuals in the private sector. Importance Many privately owned businesses could now refuse service to African Americans

Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Illinois (1886) Background An Illinois law was passed to prevent “long-haul—short haul discrimination by the railroads within the state. The law would help small towns who did not have service from competing railroads. Constitutional Issue Can the state government regulate railroad rates on that portion of an interstate journey that is within the boundaries of the state?

Wabash v. Illinois Decision Importance The Illinois law was invalid and power to regulate the railroads belongs exclusively to Congress, not the states. Importance The Court’s decision increased the power of the federal government through the use of the commerce clause. Congress passed the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887 to regulate the railroads and it established the Interstate Commerce Commission to enforce the regulation of interstate commerce.

United States v. E.C. Knight Co. (1895) Background The American Sugar Refining Co. had purchased stock in smaller companies and controlled 90% of the sugar processed in the United States. The federal government sued under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act to break up the monopoly. Constitutional Issue Was the manufacturing process interstate commerce regulated by the federal government OR was it intrastate commerce to be regulated by the state government? Does the Sherman Anti-Trust Act outlaw manufacturing monopolies?

U.S. v. E.C. Knight Co. Decision Importance Federal gov’t could not regulate refineries since they were manufacturing operations not directly related to interstate commerce. States (under the 10th amendment – reserved powers) should have right to regulate local activities such as manufacturing. Importance Set-back for the federal govt’s attempt to break up monopolies and restore competition. Later Supreme Court decisions modified decision and allowed Congress broader powers to regulate commerce.

In Re Debs (1895) Background Constitutional Issue Federal gov’t issued injunction ordering American Railway workers union to stop Pullman Strike. Eugene V. Debs, officer of the union, convicted of “contempt of court” when he refused to stop the strike. Debs then appealed his conviction. Constitutional Issue Does the federal government have constitutional authority to stop railroad workers from striking?

In Re Debs Decision Importance Court upheld authority of federal government to stop strike. The railway workers strike had interfered with the railroads ability to carry commerce and mail which benefited the “general welfare” of the American people. Importance Illustrated the government’s “anti-labor” policy that made it difficult for American workers to improve working conditions. While Eugene Debs was serving his prison sentence, he read about socialism and came to believe that socialism might be best for the American workers. Debs led the American Socialist Party and ran for the U.S. Presidency several times.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Background Constitutional Issue Homer Plessy, a man of mixed race, was seated in the train car reserved for “white only” passengers. He refused to move to the car for the non-white passengers and Plessy was arrested for violating the Louisiana Act of 1890, which required railroad companies to provide “separate but equal” accommodations for white and black races. Constitutional Issue Do laws that provide for the separation of races violate the rights of blacks as guaranteed by the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment?

Plessy v. Ferguson Decision Importance Court stated that Louisiana Act of 1890 (separate but equal accommodations for white and black races) did not violate the Constitution. Court believed that “separate but equal” was the most reasonable approach considering the social prejudices at the time. Importance Led the way for states to create “separate but equal” facilities, allowing for legal segregation based on race. “Jim Crow” ruled the South. (This decision was eventually overturned by Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka in 1954 when the Court ruled “separate but equal” was unconstitutional.)

Northern Securities Co. v. United States (1904) Background Two competing railroad companies set up a holding company to buy the controlling interest of the two railroads. The constitutionality of the holding company was questioned when President Theodore Roosevelt pursued his “trust busting” campaign under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890 Constitutional Issue Does the Congress have the authority under the commerce clause to regulate the holding company’s effort to eliminate competition?

Northern Securities Company v. United States Decision The Supreme Court ruled that a holding company formed solely to eliminate competition between the 2 railroads was in violation of the anti-trust laws because it unreasonably restrained commerce. Importance The federal government now had the authority to regulate any conspiracy which sought to eliminate competition between otherwise competitive railroads. The government’s policy of trust busting helped restore competition in the American economy.

Lochner v. New York (1905) Background Constitutional Issue A New York law limited the number of hours bakery employees could work. Lochner was convicted and fined for permitting an employee to work more than the lawful number of hours in one week. Constitutional Issue Does the law limiting the number of hours the employees were allowed to work interfere with the bakery owner’s right to make employer/employee contracts?

Lochner v. New York Decision Importance The Supreme Court ruled that even thought states have the power to regulate areas of health, safety, morals, and public welfare, the New York law in question was not within the limits of these “police powers” of the State. Importance During the time that Progressive reformers were working to improve the conditions and terms of employment for Americans, the Court struck down a number of state laws that interfered with an individual’s economic and property rights. (This decision was later overturned by the Court.)

Muller v. Oregon (1908) Background An Oregon law prohibited women from working in factories or laundries more than 10 hours a day. Mr. Muller was convicted for making a female employee work more than the 10 hour limit. Constitutional Issue Does the state of Oregon’s law regulating women’s work hours violate the “privileges and immunities” clause of the 14th amendment by forbidding the employment of women for more than ten hours a day in laundries and factories?

Muller v. Oregon Decision Importance The Court upheld the Oregon law that barred women from certain factory and laundry work. The Court took into account the physical differences between men and women, based on the brief submitted by Louis D. Brandeis stating that “women’s physical structure and the function she performs…justify special legislation restricting the conditions under which she should be permitted to toil.” Importance So-called “protective legislation” regulated the hours, locations, and type of work that women could do. This protective legislation also prevented women from entering certain occupations, many of the occupations that paid higher salaries. (The use of the “Brandeis Brief”, introducing sociological and economic data, statistics, historical records and expert opinions in addition to the legal arguments revolutionized courtroom presentations. Louis Brandeis who was known as the “people’s attorney” was later appointed to the Supreme Court by Wilson.)

Schenck v. United States (1919) Background Charles T. Schenck was convicted of violating the Espionage Act of 1917, an act that made it a crime to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty in the military. Mr. Schenck had spoken in opposition to the draft and was found in possession of anti-draft leaflets. Constitutional Issue Did the Espionage Act of 1917 violate Schenck’s 1st amendment right to freedom of speech?

Schenck v. U.S. Decision Importance The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Schenck for conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act. The Court ruled that Schenck’s speech was not constitutionally protected because it posed a “clear and present danger” to the country and the nation’s World War I effort. Importance The Court established the belief that a person’s rights are not absolute. The right to free speech does not allow a person to shout “fire” in a crowded theater. The Court’s “clear and present danger” ruling allows the restrictions of individual rights in the interest of national security.

Schechter Poultry Co. v. U.S. (1935) Background New Deal programs established by FDR the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) ,authorized the President to set “codes of fair competition” to regulate certain areas of interstate commerce. The Schechter Poultry Corp. slaughtered and sold chickens only in NY State. Schechter was convicted for disobeying the “live poultry code” when he allegedly failed to pay minimum wage requirements, sold unfit, uninspected “sick” chickens, and made false reports Constitutional Issue Was the NIRA, that gave the President the authority to regulate certain aspects of commerce during the Depression, an unconstitutional delegation of presidential power?

Schechter Poultry v. U.S. Decision Importance The Supreme Court ruled that the delegation of power made by the NIRA was unconstitutional because it gave the executive branch legislative powers. The NIRA was declared unconstitutional because it exceeded the commerce power that had been given to Congress by the Constitution. Importance A major New Deal law was declared unconstitutional. FDR attempted to “reform” the Supreme Court by proposing that he be allowed to appoint an additional justice for each justice over the age of 70. It would allow FDR to increase the number of justices from 9 to 15. The plan to “pack the Supreme Court” was rejected by Congress as a violation of separation of powers.

United States v. Butler (1936) Background AAA gave subsidies to farmers not to grow certain crops; Money to pay farmers came from tax on processors Cotton processors challenged claiming gov’t. couldn’t tax processors to benefit farmers

United States v. Butler Constitutional Issue Decision Importance Is the AAA a proper use of Congressional power to tax? Decision AAA is unconstitutional Agriculture defined as INTRA-state commerce, not INTER-state regulated by national gov’t. Importance Setback for New Deal Worsened relationship between President and Supreme Court

Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) Background Constitutional Issue After the attack at Pearl Harbor in 1941, FDR issued Executive Order #9066 ordering Japanese Americans to relocate to designated internment camps. Fred Korematsu refused to relocate and was convicted of violating the orders. Constitutional Issue Did Executive Order #9066 violate Korematsu’s 14th amendment right to equal protection of the law and his 5th amendment right to due process?

Korematsu v. U.S. Decision Importance The Supreme Court decided that an entire race could be labeled a “suspect classification”, meaning that the government could deny their constitutional rights because of national security concerns. Importance The Supreme Court reinforced the government’s concern for national security issues during wartime by ruling an individual’s rights may be limited. The decision was later overturned and in the 1980’s, Japanese Americans who had been sent to the internment camps received an official apology and monetary compensation from the U.S. government.