If Baker v. Carr opened the courthouse door to reapportionment claims, Reynolds v. Sims told courts what the Constitution requires once they get inside. The basic answer is the phrase every 1L eventually memorizes: one person, one vote. That is why Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964) is one of the most important Equal Protection and voting-rights cases in Constitutional Law. It held that seats in both houses of a state legislature must be apportioned on a population basis s

If Youngstown is about the limits of presidential power, Baker v. Carr is about a different threshold question: When will federal courts refuse to hear a constitutional dispute because it is a “political question”? And the Court’s answer in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) was hugely important: This case is not a political question. The federal courts can hear it. That is why Baker is one of the core Con Law cases every 1L should know. It is famous for: making legislative r

If Cooper v. Aaron is about whether states can resist the Constitution, Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer is about whether the President can act without Congress in the name of emergency. The Supreme Court’s answer was: Not here. That is why Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) is one of the most important separation-of-powers cases every 1L should know. It is famous both for: the Court’s holding that President Truman could not seize the steel mills,

If Brown v. Board of Education said that state-sponsored school segregation violates the Constitution, Cooper v. Aaron answered the next question: What happens when state officials refuse to comply? The Supreme Court’s answer was simple and forceful: They still must comply. That is why Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958) is a foundational Constitutional Law case. It stands for the proposition that state officials are bound by the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Cour

If McCulloch v. Maryland teaches 1Ls that federal power can be broad, Gibbons v. Ogden teaches the next major point: Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce is broad too. That is why Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824) is one of the core Constitutional Law cases in the federal power unit. It helps define: what counts as commerce, what it means for commerce to be among the several states, and why conflicting state laws must give way when Congress validly regulates inte

If Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee teaches that the Supreme Court can review state-court decisions on federal questions, then Cohens v. Virginia teaches the next important point: That review also extends to state criminal cases. That is why Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821) is such an important case for 1Ls. It reinforces the Supreme Court’s power to review state-court judgments when a federal issue is properly raised—even where a state itself is a party and even where the cas

If Marbury v. Madison is about judicial review, and McCulloch v. Maryland is about federal power, then Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee is about who gets the final word on federal law. And the answer is: the U.S. Supreme Court does. That is why Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 14 U.S. 304 (1816) is a foundational case in Constitutional Law and Federal Courts. It establishes that the Supreme Court may review state-court decisions on federal questions. This post is part of a Con Law for 1Ls

If Marbury v. Madison teaches 1Ls about judicial review, then McCulloch v. Maryland teaches them about federal power. This is one of the most important Constitutional Law cases you will read because it answers two huge questions: Can Congress do things that are not expressly listed in the Constitution? Can a state interfere with a valid federal institution? Chief Justice John Marshall’s answer to both questions was basically: federal power is broad within its constitutional s

If you are a 1L in Constitutional Law, there are a few cases you absolutely need to know cold. Marbury v. Madison is one of them. In fact, it may be the case your professor uses to introduce the role of the Supreme Court in the constitutional system. Why? Because Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) is the case that gave us the foundational idea of judicial review: the power of courts to refuse to enforce laws that conflict with the Constitution. This post is part of a Con L