constitutional law spring 2008 prof fischer n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPRING 2008 PROF. FISCHER PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPRING 2008 PROF. FISCHER

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 15

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPRING 2008 PROF. FISCHER - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 161 Views
  • Uploaded on

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPRING 2008 PROF. FISCHER. Class 25 The Dormant Commerce Clause Part I. Cooley v. Board of Wardens of the Port of Philadelphia (1851) [C p. 388]. Justice Benjamin Curtis (joined by Taney, Catron, Nelson, Grier, McKinley) 2 dissenters (McLean, Wayne)

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPRING 2008 PROF. FISCHER' - mateja


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
constitutional law spring 2008 prof fischer

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SPRING 2008PROF. FISCHER

Class 25

The Dormant Commerce Clause Part I

cooley v board of wardens of the port of philadelphia 1851 c p 388
Cooley v. Board of Wardens of the Port of Philadelphia (1851) [C p. 388]
  • Justice Benjamin Curtis (joined by Taney, Catron, Nelson, Grier, McKinley)
  • 2 dissenters (McLean, Wayne)
  • Justice Daniel dissented in reasoning but joined the judgment
shift to a balancing approach
Shift to a Balancing Approach
  • South Carolina State Highway Dep’t v. Barnwell (1938) [C p. 390] (unanimous opinion of Stone; Cardozo and Reed did not participate)
  • Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona (1945) [C p. 391] (majority opinion of Stone; Black and Douglas dissented (counsel deference to legislature; disagree that unwise government policy to limit the length of trains))
balancing differs
Balancing Differs
  • Depending on whether law is discriminatory (strict scrutiny) or not discriminatory (a type of intermediate scrutiny)
when is a law discriminatory
When is a Law Discriminatory?
  • 2 ways
  • 1. Facial discrimination
  • 2. Discriminatory in purpose or effect
philadelphia v new jersey 1978 c p 395
Philadelphia v. New Jersey (1978) [C p. 395]
  • Majority by: StewartJoined by: Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, StevensDissent by: RehnquistJoined by: Burger
c a carbone inc v town of clarkstown new york 1994 c p 3971
C & A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown, New York (1994) [C p. 397]
  • Majority opinion by Kennedy, joined by Stevens, Scalia, Thomas, GinsburgConcurrence by: O'ConnorDissent by: SouterJoined by: Rehnquist, Blackmun
hughes v oklahoma 1979 c p 4011
Hughes v. Oklahoma (1979) [C p. 401]
  • Majority by Brennan, joined by Stewart. White, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, and Stevens
  • Rehnquist filed a dissenting opinion, in which Burger joined
hunt governor of north carolina v washington state apple advertising comm n 1977 c p 402
Unanimous

Opinion of the Court by Burger

Hunt, Governor of North Carolina v. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm’n (1977) [C p. 402]
west lynn creamery inc v healy 1994 c p 407
West Lynn Creamery, Inc v. Healy (1994) [C p. 407]
  • Stevens, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, and Ginsburg joined.
  • Scalia filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Thomas joined
  • Rehnquist filed a dissenting opinion, in which Blackmun joined.
exxon corp v governor of maryland 1978 c p 404
Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland (1978) [C p. 404]
  • Stevens wrote majority opinion; he was joined by: Burger, Brennan, Stewart, White, Marshall, Rehnquist
  • Blackman was the only dissenter
state of minnesota v clover leaf creamery 1981 c p 409
State of Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery (1981) [C p. 409]
  • Justice Brennan wrote majority opinion, joined by Marshall, Burger, White, Stewart, Powell, Blackmun
  • Rehnquist did not participate
  • Stevens was the sole dissenter
  • Clover Leaf Creamery acquired by Kemps in 1979 which became part of MA Hood company in 2004