Class Notes (806,815)
United States (312,228)
Boston College (3,489)
POLI 2327 (25)
All (25)

Complete Lecture 22 Notes

7 Pages
Unlock Document

Boston College
Political Science
POLI 2327

11/19/13 Lecture 22 • New deal • Wickard v. Fillburn o Nothing congress could do that could be beyond the commerce power  Court getting out of business striking down federal initiatives o Since then, Supreme court never struck down any law on commerce power grounds until the 1990s • Supreme Court was immensely powerful constitution o FDR transformed the court, main precedents were overthrown, and new sets of understandings were there  Judicial deference – the whole way the period was framed n constitutional theory was peoples representatives vs. judges • Progressive opinion = role of judges is to be deferential to democratic government o Not exercise judicial review or exercise it in rare cases where there was a clear constitutional mistake • Does not survive as attitude of liberals toward the judiciaries o Set out a whole new agenda in which the judiciary is just as active and aggressive at striking down laws as the Lochner era was  Gets into civil rights and civil liberties – enforcing the bill of rights through judicial reviews, strike down laws violated equal protection of laws, process clause of 15 amendment, commerce power • Conservatives are starting to make same allegations of liberals o Appointing people who are activist judges • Carolene Products o Law that no dairy products contain less than 87% milk o Court is going to be deferential to congress when it comes to commerce regulations  Same goes for this case EXCEPT FOR THE FOOTNOTE • Drafted by Justice Stone • Sets agenda of supreme court for next 50 years o Court starts with progressive view  Wont inquire into law – not their role to substitute their own views for views of elected representative • FOOTNOTE (liberal) – 3 different categories in how they are going to take a hard look at certain legislation, not going to be deferential o First part: when legislation violates the 10 amendments  Going to be skeptical about constitutionality  Assumption that law might not be constitutional o Second part: legislation that restricts voting  Not deferential to an elected legislature when there is a question whether that legislature is representative of the people o Third part: when the law discriminates against a particular group, they are going to be more skeptical • How were civil liberties enforced before this? o Some people say they weren’t o Restriction was always upheld as legitimate  Court was out of business oof enforcing bill of rights • Prior to incorporation (BoR were held not to apply as restrictions on states and most laws that infringed were state laws) o Court held that Bill of Rights didn’t apply to them o Prevailing test for violation of civil liberties  Did legislature pass law to protect the common good? • Tiers of Scrutiny Framework o Depending on what discrimination is made, court will have various degrees of skepticism  If law classifies people by certain categories  STRICT SCRUTINY • Race is the classic example of that o Need to prove why they need a classification, if theres no good reason it’s obviously unconstitutional • Benign discrimination o For the purpose of helping people • Invidious discrimination o For the purpose of hurting people o Rational basis test  Presumption is that the law IS constitutiona • Judges will defer to legislature in every case unless it is completely irrational and arbitrary o Intermediate Scrutiny  Classification against women/sex • There are some reasons why you want to classify women from men, are gonna be kinda skeptical of it o Separate bathrooms, can’t fight in combat  Court will look to see if there’s a legitimate reason for it • Homosexuals have never been classified as a separate category under strict scrutiny o Use rational basis test  Supposed to mean that you are going to uphold the law because there are very few laws that have no rational basis • People charge the court with making things up depending on their attiudes and particular view • Lawrence v. Texas o Exchange between Kennedy and Scolea  Skolea
More Less

Related notes for POLI 2327

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.