8/12/2019 Ap prep 1800 2

1/5

1. Marbury V. Madison-Date: 1803

Constitutional Issue: Madison, Secretary of State under Thomas Jefferson, refused to

deliver an appointment letter signed by Adams to Marbury; Marbury demanded the courtforce Madison to release the letter

Courts decision: (Marshall) Court ruled that Marbury was entitled to his commission,

but that according to the Constitution, the Court did not have the authority to require

Madison to deliver the commission to Marbury in this case

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: established Judicial Review and made the judiciary an equal branch

in every way with the legislative and the executive

Area of Impact: Federalism

2. McCulloh V. Maryland-Date: 1819

Constitutional Issue: the federal government was becoming too powerful; the

Constitution does not give congress the power to create a national bank; Maryland had

the power to tax any business in its state

Courts decision: (Marshall) Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of McCulloch

and against the state of Maryland

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: Congress has the authority to pass any law that is necessary and

proper to exercise its power as specified in the Constitution; States are subject to the

power of the federal government; national bank controls the countrys currency by

preventing inflation and regulating money supplyArea of Impact: State taxes, National Supremacy

3. Fletcher V. Peck-Date: 1810

Constitutional Issue: Is a law that negates all property rights established under an earlier

law unconstitutional?

Courts decision: (Marshall) Court ruled that ,yes, a law that negates all property rights

established under an earlier law is unconstitutional for violating the Contract Clause

(Article I, Section 10) of the United States Constitution; 1796 law was an

unconstitutional ex post facto law that sought to penalize bona fide purchasers for wrongscommitted by those from whom they were purchasing

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: first Supreme Court ruling to strike down a state law; the ruling

established a protective attitude to commercial interests (businesses) by the courts; Court

recognized the Contract Clause as a key tool to limit state regulation of economic matters

involving contracts and property rights; Federal protection of property rights, often using

the Contract Clause, led to overturning numerous state laws through the next century;

8/12/2019 Ap prep 1800 2

2/5

importance of contracts in American life was established; the ruling also established that

grants, such as state land grants, are the same under the law as contracts between private

individuals; reassured the public about purchasing lands as they became available as the

United States expanded westward.

Area of Impact: States rights; Ex-post facto laws

4. Dartmouth College V. Woodward-Date: 1819

Constitutional Issue:New Hampshire had attempted to take over Dartmouth College byrevising its colonial charter. Under the Constitution, can a state legislature change the

charter of a college?

Courts decision: (Marshall) the Court ruled that the charter was protected under the

contract clause of the U. S. Constitution

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: greatly encouraged business investment and growth; attract

investors, employ workers, and to add to the national prosperity because states cantimpair charters

Area of Impact: Contract Clause, Limitations on the Powers of the States

5. Gibbons V. OgdenDate: 1824

Constitutional Issue:Can states pass laws that challenge the power of Congress toregulate interstate commerce?

Courts decision: (Marshall) The Court held that it is the role of the federal government

to regulate commerce and that state governments cannot develop their own commerce-

regulating lawsPol/Soc/Econ effects: gives the federal government a much-broader base to regulate

economic transactions;Court created a wide definition for commerce, reasoning that theterm encompassed more than just selling and buying; regulating water navigation was in

fact an act that regulated commerce

Area of Impact: State Rights, Commerce Clause

6. Charles River Bridge V. Warren Bridge-Date: 1837

Constitutional Issue: Did the legislature enter into an economic contract with the Charles

River Bridge Company that was impaired by the second charter in violation of Article I

Section 10 of the Constitution?

Courts decision: (Taney) the Court held that the state had not entered a contract that

prohibited the construction of another bridge on the river at a later date

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: interests of the community are more important than the interests of

business; the supremacy of societysinterest over private interest

8/12/2019 Ap prep 1800 2

3/5

Area of Impact: Contract Clause

7. Cherokee Nation V. Georgia-Date:1831Constitutional Issue: Does the Georgia have the constitutional right to remove the

Cherokee from its lands?

Courts decision: (Marshall) the Court ruled in favor of Georgia by finding that the

Supreme Court had no legal authority to hear the dispute because Indian tribes are

"domestic dependent nations," not foreign nations.

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: Court left the Cherokees at the mercy of the state of Georgia and

its land-hungry citizens; late 1838, the Cherokee were forcefully marched under winter

conditions from their homes in northwest Georgia to lands set aside in Oklahoma; four

thousand died in military detention camps and along the infamous "Trail of Tears

Area of Impact: U.S. policy towardNative Americans; States Rights

8.

Worchester V. Georgia-Date: 1832

Constitutional Issue: Does the state of Georgia have the authority to regulate the

intercourse between citizens of its state and members of the Cherokee Nation?

Courts decision: (Marshall) the Court held that the Georgia act, under which Worcester

was prosecuted, violated the Constitution, treaties, and laws of the United States

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: Established tribal autonomy within Cherokee boundaries

Area of Impact: U.S. policy toward Native Americans; States Rights

9. United States V. Reynolds-Date: 1878Constitutional Issue: Does religious duty defend a criminal indictment?

Courts decision: (Waite) the court held that religious duty was not a defense to a

criminal indictment

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: polygamy ruled unconstitutional; restriction of Mormon faith,

which is against First Amendment right to freedom of religion (Church of Jesus Christ

of Latter Day Saints)

Area of Impact: Morill Anti-bigamy Act, First Amendment Rights

10.Munn V. Illinois-Date: 1876

Constitutional Issue:Whether the regulation of railroad rates by the state of Illinoisdeprived the railroad companies of property without due process of law.

Courts decision: (Waite) the states may regulate the use of private property "when such

regulation becomes necessary for the public good; upheld Granger Laws

8/12/2019 Ap prep 1800 2

4/5

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: States could regulate certain businesses involved in facilitating the

public interest; substantive due process",citizens are found to have "fundamental

rights", including freedom of contract and property rights, which mitigate against state

interference for less than overwhelming public need

Area of Impact: States Rights, due process

11.Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific RR Co. V. Illinois -Date: 1886

Constitutional Issue:Whether a state government has the power to regulate railroadprices on that portion of an interstate journey that lies within its borders.

Courts Decision:Supreme Court of the United States held the Illinois statute to beinvalid and that the power to regulate interstate railroad rates is a federal power which

belongs exclusively to Congress and, therefore, cannot be exercised by individual states

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: Led to the creation of Interstate Commerce Commission, which

had the power to regulate interstate commerce; state-passed Granger laws that regulatedinterstate commerce unconstitutional.

Area of Impact: Individual Property Rights v. State Rights/Commerce Clause\

12.United States V. E.C. Knight Co.-Date: 1895

Constitutional Issue:Whether Congress has the authority to regulate manufacturing; andwhether the Sherman Anti-Trust Act outlawed manufacturing monopolies

Courts Decision: the Court held that the federal government could not regulate

refineries since they were manufacturing operations that were not directlyrelated to

interstate commerce; the states, under the Tenth Amendment, should have the rightreserved to them to regulate local activities,such as manufacturing

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: Due to a narrow interpretation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the

Court undermined the authority of the federal government to act against monopolies;

continuation of monopolies and decline in small businesses

Area of Impact: Anti-Trust Acts/Congressional Power v. Free Enterprise

13.United States V. Northern Securities-Date: 1904 (President Theodore Roosevelts trust busting campaign)Constitutional Issue: Whether the United States Congress had the authority under the

Commerce Clause in the Constitution of the United States to regulate the holding

companys effort to eliminate competition

Courts Decision:the Courtfound that a holding company formed solely to eliminatecompetition between the two railroads was in violation of the Federal Anti-Trust Act

because it unreasonably restrained interstate and international commerce, the Federal

8/12/2019 Ap prep 1800 2

5/5

Anti-Trust Act could apply to any conspiracy which sought to eliminate competition

between otherwise competitive railroads.

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: Re-established the authority of the federal government to fight

monopolies under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act; decrease in monopolies

Area of Impact: Restraints of Trade/Federal Anti-Trust/Commerce Clause

14.Plessy V. Ferguson-Date: 1896

Constitutional Issue: Whether laws which provided for the separation of races violated

the rights of blacks as guaranteed by the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth

Amendment

Courts Decision: the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Louisiana Act of

1890, which stated that all railway companies were to provide equal but separate

accommodations for white and black races did not violate the Constitution, did not take

away from the federal authority to regulate interstate commerce, did not violate theThirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery, and the law did not violate the

Fourteenth Amendment, which gave all blacks citizenship, and forbade states from

passing any laws which would deprive blacks of their constitutional rights

Pol/Soc/Econ effects: Legalized segregation in publicly owned facilities on the basis of

"separate but equal."; maintained social prejudices against African Americans; led to the

establishment of Jim Crow Laws in the South, which restricted African American

participation in politics, the economy, and social functions

Area of Impact: "Separate but Equal," Equal Protection V. State Rights