Judicial Interpretation: Judges are asked to apply the Constitution to a legal issue The exact wording of the Constitution The original intent of the framers when they wrote the Constitution Court precedent-past decisions of the Supreme Court The practical effects for society Moral and ethical values

Strict Construction: Literal reading of the Constitution Judges should interpret the Constitution as it was written They should not try to make it conform to modern values

Loose Construction: flexible reading of the Constitution Modern values and social effects must be considered when interpreting the Constitution Times Change!

Marbury v. Madison (1803) Established judicial review: the court can overturn laws or government actions that do not comply with the Constitution

The Case: John Adams (Federalist) lost the presidential election to Thomas Jefferson Adams appointed new federal judges before he left office, but he was unable to deliver all the paperwork for the appointments before he left office. Jefferson refused to deliver the remaining paperwork William Marbury was one person who didn’t receive his papers

Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the Supreme Court the power to issue a “writ of mandamus” to force an official to perform a required duty. Chief Justice declared Section 13 unconstitutional This gave the Supreme Court the authority to review the constitutionality of acts of Congress and the executive branch

McCulloch v Maryland (1819) Affirmed that the national government is more powerful than the states Upheld the implied powers (Elastic Clause)

The Case: Congress created a national bank-Bank of the United States-which some states opposed Maryland decided to tax the bank’s branches McCulloch, the cashier, refused to pay the tax

Court decided that the federal government had the right to establish banks because of the Elastic Clause in Article I, Section 8. Also determined that states cannot tax the federal government. The decision gave Congress broad powers and upheld the Supremacy Clause.

US v Nixon (1974) Reaffirmed the Rule of Law-no one, not even the President, is above the law

The Case: Burglars broke into the Democratic campaign headquarters at the Watergate complex Evidence tied the break-in to President Nixon, and a special prosecutor (Archibald Cox) asked Nixon for recorded conversations After Cox demanded the tapes, Nixon had him fired A new prosecutor was appointed and brought Nixon to court to force him to release the tapes

The Supreme Court forced Nixon to hand the tapes over to the prosecutor. The tapes proved that Nixon was involved in the break-in and lied about it (under oath) Nixon resigned.

Goss v. Lopez (1975) Established that students have the right to due process

The Case: Violence broke out between students at Central High School in Columbus, Ohio because of racial tensions 75 students were suspended for 10 days Dwight Lopez claimed he was an innocent bystander, but the school refused to hear his appeal

The Supreme Court decided that before being suspended or expelled, students should know the charges against them and have a chance to tell their side of the story.