Freeman v. Pitts(1992): 14th Amendment, School Desegregation

t The trend towards accepting schools that are largely all white or all black was furthered. Massive bussing was not considered an option

n Majority: KENNEDY: Federal courts have the authority to relinquish supervision and control of school districts even if full compliance with desegregation plans has not been achieved in every area of school operations. A school district has a duty to eliminate DE JURE segregation, not de facto. It held that when a racial imbalance is the result of population shifts, school districts and judges are not required to adopt “awkward, inconvenient, and even bizarre” measures (language taken from Swann) to achieve integrated schools.

n Concurring: SOUTER, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O’CONNER: concur only with judgement, b/c court paid insufficient attention to Swann and the connection between schools and housing.

Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee(1816): Supremacy Clause, Judicial Review

t A state district court upheld Martin’s land claim, which was based on a treaty between America and Great Britain. The Virginia Court of Appeals regarded the issue as solely a STATE ISSUE, and reversed the district court. The Supreme Court set aside the state ruling, and the state court refused to obey. The Virginia court claimed that the Supreme Court had no authority to review its judgement, and that Section 25 of Judiciary Act of 1789, which gave Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over state courts, was unconstitutional.

n Majority: STORY: An ardent defender of national interests, Storyestablished the power of S. Court to review state courts. There is nothing in constitution which restrains or limits power of congress to establish courts under every variety of form of appellate or original jurisdiction.

Date: 2015-01-02; view: 877