🫡State and Federal Constitutions Unit 10 – Constitutional Interpretation & Judicial Review

Key Constitutional Concepts

• Constitutionalism establishes the principles and framework for a government's power and authority
• Rule of law requires that all individuals and institutions, including the government, are accountable to the same laws
• Separation of powers divides the government into distinct branches (executive, legislative, and judicial) with checks and balances to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful
  • Executive branch enforces laws
  • Legislative branch creates laws
  • Judicial branch interprets laws
• Federalism distributes power between a central government and smaller political units (states)
• Individual rights protect citizens from government overreach and ensure personal freedoms (freedom of speech, religion, due process)
• Supremacy clause establishes the Constitution and federal laws as the "supreme law of the land," taking precedence over state laws and constitutions

Historical Context

• The U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1788, replaced the Articles of Confederation to create a stronger federal government
• Founding Fathers, including James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, played key roles in drafting and promoting the Constitution
  • The Federalist Papers, written by Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay, argued for ratification of the Constitution
• Bill of Rights, comprising the first ten amendments, was added in 1791 to protect individual liberties
• Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review, granting the Supreme Court the power to review the constitutionality of laws and executive actions
• The 14th Amendment (1868) extended due process and equal protection rights to state governments
• New Deal era (1930s) saw an expansion of federal power and the Supreme Court's role in interpreting the Constitution's scope

Approaches to Constitutional Interpretation

• Originalism interprets the Constitution based on the original understanding or intent of the Framers at the time of ratification
  • Textualism focuses on the plain meaning of the constitutional text
• Living constitutionalism views the Constitution as a dynamic document that should be interpreted in light of contemporary values and circumstances
• Structuralism emphasizes the Constitution's overall structure and the relationships between its provisions
• Precedent and stare decisis give weight to prior court decisions when interpreting the Constitution
• Balancing tests weigh competing interests or rights to determine constitutionality
• Judicial restraint encourages deference to the elected branches, while judicial activism promotes a more expansive role for the courts in shaping policy

Landmark Cases in Judicial Review

• Marbury v. Madison (1803) established judicial review, allowing courts to strike down unconstitutional laws
• McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) affirmed the supremacy of federal law and the Constitution's implied powers
• Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) broadly interpreted the Commerce Clause, expanding federal power over interstate commerce
• Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) ruled that African Americans were not U.S. citizens, showcasing the dangers of judicial overreach
• Lochner v. New York (1905) struck down labor regulations, exemplifying the court's "substantive due process" approach
  • This approach was later abandoned in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish (1937)
• Brown v. Board of Education (1954) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional

Powers and Limits of Judicial Review

• Judicial review allows courts to strike down unconstitutional laws and executive actions
• Courts interpret the Constitution and apply it to specific cases and controversies
• Justiciability doctrines limit the cases courts can hear (standing, ripeness, mootness, political question)
  • Standing requires plaintiffs to show injury, causation, and redressability
• Courts exercise judicial restraint by deferring to the elected branches on policy matters
• Judicial activism occurs when courts take a more expansive role in shaping policy
• Constitutional amendments and the appointment of new justices can change the court's interpretation over time

Impact on Government and Society

• Judicial review serves as a check on the legislative and executive branches, ensuring compliance with the Constitution
• Court decisions can have far-reaching effects on public policy, civil rights, and the balance of power between branches and levels of government
  • Roe v. Wade (1973) legalized abortion nationwide
  • Citizens United v. FEC (2010) expanded free speech rights for corporations in campaign finance
• Controversial decisions can lead to public backlash and calls for court reform
• The appointment of Supreme Court justices has become increasingly politicized, reflecting the court's impact on society
• Judicial review has played a crucial role in protecting individual rights and promoting equality (desegregation, marriage equality)

Current Debates and Controversies

• The proper scope of judicial review and the role of the courts in policymaking remain contested
• Originalists and living constitutionalists disagree on how to interpret the Constitution in light of modern challenges
• The appointment process for Supreme Court justices has become highly partisan and polarized
  • Confirmation hearings for nominees have grown more contentious (Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh)
• Calls for court reform, such as term limits for justices or expanding the court's size, have gained traction in recent years
• The court's legitimacy and public trust have been questioned, particularly after controversial decisions
• Debates persist over the court's role in hot-button issues like abortion, affirmative action, and LGBTQ+ rights

Practical Applications

• Attorneys and judges rely on constitutional interpretation and judicial review when arguing and deciding cases
• Policymakers must consider the constitutionality of proposed laws and executive actions
• Activists and interest groups use litigation as a strategy to advance their causes and challenge unconstitutional policies
• Media coverage of high-profile cases shapes public understanding of the court's role and impact
• Citizens can engage in the judicial process by filing lawsuits, participating in amicus briefs, or advocating for court reform
• Understanding constitutional interpretation and judicial review is crucial for informed civic participation and holding government accountable