Constitutional Law and Interpretation

Grade 11 · Social Studies · Study Guide

An examination of how the U.S. Constitution is interpreted by the Supreme Court, the major theories of constitutional interpretation, and landmark cases that have shaped American law and society.

The U.S. Constitution, written in 1787 and ratified in 1788, is a deliberately brief and general document that requires interpretation to apply to the enormous variety of situations that arise in a modern society. The Supreme Court serves as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution's meaning, exercising the power of judicial review — the authority to strike down laws that conflict with the Constitution — established in Marbury v. Madison (1803).

Justices approach constitutional interpretation through different theoretical frameworks. Originalists (like Justices Scalia and Thomas) argue that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the original meaning its words had when written or ratified. Living constitutionalists argue that the Constitution's meaning should evolve with changing social values and circumstances. Textualists focus strictly on the plain meaning of the constitutional text.

Landmark cases have transformed American society. Brown v. Board of Education (1954) overturned Plessy v. Ferguson's 'separate but equal' doctrine. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) required states to provide defense attorneys to indigent criminal defendants. Miranda v. Arizona (1966) required police to inform suspects of their rights. Roe v. Wade (1973) recognized abortion rights; Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022) overturned Roe. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) established marriage equality.

The First Amendment's protection of free speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition; the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches; and the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection and due process clauses have been the most litigated provisions of the Constitution.

Key terms

Judicial Review: The power of federal courts, especially the Supreme Court, to declare acts of Congress, the president, or state governments unconstitutional; established in Marbury v. Madison (1803).
Originalism: Theory of constitutional interpretation holding that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the original public meaning of its text at the time of ratification.
Living Constitutionalism: Theory holding that constitutional interpretation should adapt to changing social conditions and values, allowing the document's broad principles to be applied to new circumstances.
Incorporation Doctrine: The legal doctrine by which the Supreme Court has applied most provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause.
Strict Scrutiny: The highest level of judicial review; applied to laws that discriminate based on race or burden fundamental rights; government must show a compelling interest pursued by narrowly tailored means.
Stare Decisis: Latin for 'to stand by things decided'; the legal principle that courts should follow precedent, providing predictability and stability in the law; can be overturned but rarely.

Flashcards

Marbury v. Madison (1803): Chief Justice John Marshall established judicial review — the power of the Supreme Court to strike down laws that violate the Constitution — making the Court a coequal branch of government.
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Affirmed broad federal power under the Necessary and Proper Clause; ruled states cannot tax federal institutions; established supremacy of federal law over state law.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Unanimous Supreme Court ruling that racial segregation in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment; overturned Plessy v. Ferguson.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966): Required police to inform suspects of their right to remain silent and to have an attorney before questioning; produced the 'Miranda warning' still used today.
Roe v. Wade (1973): Ruled women have a constitutional right to abortion under the right to privacy implied in the Due Process Clause; overturned in 2022 by Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015): Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that same-sex couples have a fundamental right to marry under the 14th Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.
First Amendment: Prohibits government from abridging freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition; the most litigated amendment; protects unpopular speech, symbolic speech, and most political speech.
Fourth Amendment: Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures; requires probable cause and warrants; extended to digital communications and cell phone searches (Riley v. California, 2014).

Questions

In which case did the Supreme Court establish the power of judicial review?
1. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
2. Marbury v. Madison (1803)
3. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
4. Fletcher v. Peck (1810)
Show answer
Answer: Marbury v. Madison (1803)
In Marbury v. Madison (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall asserted that it is 'emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is,' establishing judicial review as a cornerstone of American constitutionalism.
The Bill of Rights originally applied directly to both the federal government and state governments.
Show answer
Answer: False
The Bill of Rights originally applied only to the federal government; this was confirmed in Barron v. Baltimore (1833). The Supreme Court later used the 14th Amendment's due process clause to 'incorporate' most Bill of Rights protections against state governments.
The constitutional doctrine of _______ scrutiny requires the government to show a compelling interest and narrowly tailored means when laws discriminate based on race or burden fundamental rights.
Show answer
Answer: strict
Under strict scrutiny, the government must demonstrate a compelling government interest and show its law is narrowly tailored — using the least restrictive means — to achieve that interest; most laws subjected to strict scrutiny are struck down.
The Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC (2010) held that:
1. Corporations could not make political donations to candidates
2. Political spending by corporations and unions is a form of protected free speech under the First Amendment
3. Individual campaign contribution limits were unconstitutional
4. Foreign governments could not fund American political organizations
Show answer
Answer: Political spending by corporations and unions is a form of protected free speech under the First Amendment
In Citizens United v. FEC (2010), the Court ruled 5-4 that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations, associations, and labor unions, opening the door to unlimited 'super PAC' spending.
The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, provides the constitutional basis for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states.
Show answer
Answer: True
The 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause provides: 'No state shall...deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.' The Supreme Court has interpreted this to 'incorporate' most Bill of Rights protections against state governments.

Get a personalized course on Constitutional Law and Interpretation built around your child.