Author: esquire
-
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
IRAC Summary Issue: The central issue in Brown v. Board of Education was whether the doctrine of “separate but equal” established by the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) decision, which permitted state-sponsored segregation in public education, was constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rule: The Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits states…
-
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Brief Summary of Marbury v. Madison Issue: Whether the Supreme Court has the authority to issue writs of mandamus under the Judiciary Act of 1789, and if so, whether it can compel the Secretary of State to deliver commissions to appointed justices of the peace. Rule: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land,…
-
State v. Shack (1971)
IRAC Summary Issue: The primary legal issue in State v. Shack is whether private property owners can deny access to government assistance providers seeking to aid migrant workers living on their property. Rule: The New Jersey Supreme Court held that property rights are not absolute and can be limited by the necessity to protect the…
-
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
IRAC Summary: Grutter v. Bollinger Issue: Whether the use of race as a factor in the student admissions process by the University of Michigan Law School, which aimed to achieve a diverse student body, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Rule: The…
-
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
IRAC Summary Issue: The primary issue in Lawrence v. Texas is whether the criminal conviction of two adults for engaging in consensual homosexual conduct in the privacy of a home is a violation of their liberty under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rule: The relevant legal rule comes from the Fourteenth Amendment’s…
-
Crawford v. Washington (2004)
Brief Summary of Crawford v. Washington (2004) Issue The primary issue in Crawford v. Washington was whether the use of a taped statement by the wife of the defendant during his trial violated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause, which guarantees a defendant the right to confront witnesses against him. Rule The Confrontation Clause of the…
-
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992)
IRAC Summary Issue: Whether the respondents (Defenders of Wildlife) have the requisite standing to challenge a rule promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior interpreting Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, which limits the scope of the Act to actions taken in the United States or on the high seas. Rule: To…
-
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)
IRAC Summary: Issue: The primary issue in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) is whether the President of the United States has the constitutional authority to take possession of and operate most of the steel mills in the country during a labor dispute without congressional authorization. Rule: The Constitution does not explicitly grant…
-
Kelo v. City of New London (2005)
Brief Summary (IRAC): Issue: The primary issue in Kelo v. City of New London was whether the city’s decision to exercise its power of eminent domain to acquire private property for economic development purposes constituted a “public use” under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Rule: The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which includes the…
-
Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court (2021)
IRAC SUMMARY: Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court (2021) Issue: The primary legal issue in this case was whether Ford Motor Company (Ford) could be sued for product liability in a state where the vehicle at issue was not designed, manufactured, sold, or originally purchased, but where the plaintiff resided and the…
-
Massachusetts v. EPA (2007)
IRAC Summary Issue: Whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases due to their contribution to climate change and, if so, whether its refusal to exercise this authority is justifiable. Rule: The Clean Air Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate…
-
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)
IRAC Summary: Issue: Whether the Alabama libel law, as applied to a full-page ad in the New York Times, infringes upon the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech, particularly with regard to criticism of public officials. Rule: The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as applied through the Fourteenth Amendment, protects the freedom…
-
Moore v. Regents of the University of California (1990)
IRAC Summary Issue: The central issue in Moore v. Regents of the University of California concerns the extent of a patient’s property rights in his or her own body tissues after those tissues have been removed during medical procedures. Specifically, the case examines whether a patient must give informed consent for the use of his…
-
Armory v. Delamirie (1722)
IRAC Summary Issue: The primary issue in Armory v. Delamirie (1722) is whether the finder of a jewel (the plaintiff) has the right to damages when the jewel is not returned by the person (the defendant) who took it to appraise it, and whether the plaintiff is entitled to the highest value the jewel could…
-
Johnson v. M’Intosh (1823)
Brief Summary of Johnson v. M’Intosh (1823) Issue: Whether private citizens can purchase lands from Native Americans, thereby acquiring valid legal title, or whether the right of soil and title to such lands is exclusively vested in the government. Rule: Under the Doctrine of Discovery, upon discovering new lands, sovereign European nations gained the exclusive…
-
Pierson v. Post (1805) – Fox hunting case
IRAC Summary: Issue: Whether Post, who was pursuing a fox with the intent to capture it, has the legal right to the fox over Pierson, who actually killed and captured the fox. Rule: A wild animal (ferae naturae) may be claimed by the first person who captures it with the intent to take possession. The…
-
Shelby County v. Holder (2013)
IRAC Summary Issue: The primary issue in Shelby County v. Holder was whether Congress’s decision to reauthorize Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), which required certain jurisdictions to obtain federal preclearance before implementing changes to their voting laws, exceeded its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and thus was unconstitutional.…
-
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Brief Summary: Texas v. Johnson (1989) Issue: Whether the desecration of an American flag as a means of political protest is protected speech under the First Amendment. Rule: The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits laws abridging the freedom of speech. Application: In this case, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag as an…
-
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
IRAC Summary: Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) Issue: Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple’s ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives? Rule: The specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.…
-
Loving v. Virginia (1967)
IRAC Summary: Issue: Whether Virginia’s statutory scheme to prevent marriages between persons solely on the basis of racial classifications violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rule: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits states from segregating or discriminating against individuals on the…