Alberto > Status Update

Clinton v NYC, the death of the line item veto

Bush v Gore, 2000

South Carolina v Katzenbach, challenging the Voting Rights Act of 1965

US v Curtiss-Wright Export Co.

Powell v McCormack 1969

Baker v Carr 1962, which defined the boundaries of which political questions were justiciable, and which opened the window for judicial involvement in legislative districting

John Gibson's dissent in Eakin v Raub (1825), which attempts to provide a rebuttal of the judicial claim to the power to review acts of the legislature

Martin v Hunter's Lessee, 1816, in which the Supreme Court extended judicial review to act of the individual states Since judicial review was well-known to the members of the constitutional convention, why not mention it explicitly (one way or the other)? Seems a deliberate attempt to get it in surreptitiously while avoiding giving the anti-Federalists an argument against ratification by inserting it explicitly.

Marbury v Madison, 1803, establishing judicial review