Title: Oklahoma Law School 1L Study Guide for Constitutional Law
I. THE CONSTITUTION
Summary: The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, providing the legal framework for the federal government, individual states, and citizens.
Case: Marbury v. Madison (1803) established judicial review, the power of the judiciary to interpret the Constitution and invalidate inconsistent legislation.
IRAC: Issue – Marbury sought a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court. Rule – The Judiciary Act of 1789, in expanding the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, was found inconsistent with Article III of the Constitution. Analysis – The Court found that Marbury had a right to his commission, but it could not issue a writ due to an unconstitutional law. Conclusion – Federal courts have the power to invalidate unconstitutional laws.
II. THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Summary: The first ten amendments to the Constitution, which outline the individual freedoms protected from governmental infringement.
Case: Oklahoma Publishing Co v. District Court (1977) relates to First Amendment Freedom of Press.
IRAC: Issue – Whether the First Amendment permits a state court to prohibit the publishing of information legally obtained in a courtroom? Rule – The First Amendment protects the publication of information legally obtained in a courtroom. Analysis – The Court held that once a person is at a public trial, that person can be photographed and those photographs can be published. Conclusion – A state court cannot prohibit the dissemination of legally obtained information.
III. THE COMMERCE CLAUSE
Summary: Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, granting Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the states.
Case: Wickard v. Filburn (1942) expanded the interpretation of the Commerce Clause.
IRAC: Issue – Does the Agricultural Adjustment Act’s quota on wheat production violate the Commerce Clause? Rule – The Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Analysis – The Court held that even if Filburn’s wheat production was local and intended for personal use, it influenced supply and demand in the interstate wheat market. Conclusion – Congress can regulate intrastate activities that have a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce.
IV. EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE
Summary: The Fourteenth Amendment prevents states from denying any person “equal protection of the laws.”
Case: Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
IRAC: Issue – Does segregation of public schools based on race violate the Equal Protection Clause? Rule – Racial segregation in public schools violates the Equal Protection Clause. Analysis – The Court held that “separate but equal” facilities are inherently unequal in the context of public education. Conclusion – Racial segregation in public schools is unconstitutional.
V. DUE PROCESS CLAUSES
Summary: The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the government from depriving individuals of “life, liberty, or property” without due process of law.
Case: Roe v. Wade (1973)
IRAC: Issue – Does the Constitution protect a woman’s right to have an abortion? Rule – The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects a woman’s decision to have an abortion. Analysis – The Court held that the right to privacy is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision to have an abortion. Conclusion – The Constitution protects a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion.
VI. FIRST AMENDMENT – FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Summary: The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech, both in terms of content and medium.
Case: Cohen v. California (1971)
IRAC: Issue – Does the First Amendment allow a state to punish a person for engaging in symbolic speech? Rule – The First Amendment protects freedom of expression, including symbolic speech. Analysis – The Court held that Cohen’s jacket, which read “F*** the Draft,” was protected speech. Conclusion – Symbolic speech is protected under the First Amendment.
VII: FOURTH AMENDMENT – SEARCH AND SEIZURE
Summary: The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Case: Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
IRAC: Issue – Are evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment admissible in state courts? Rule – The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule applies to state courts. Analysis – The Court held that all evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible in any court. Conclusion – The exclusionary rule applies to both federal and state courts.
This guide serves as a foundation for Constitutional Law, focusing on key concepts and high-profile cases. However, each topic has more depth and additional cases that may be covered in your class, so refer to your class notes, textbooks, and other resources for further study.