Week-by-Week Schedule
Judicial Review and the Role of the Supreme Court
Week 1 of 14
Readings
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803); Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.) 304 (1816); Casebook Ch. 1
Key Concepts to Master
- Judicial review under Article III
- Countermajoritarian difficulty
- Justiciability doctrines: standing, ripeness, mootness
- Political question doctrine (Baker v. Carr factors)
- Case or controversy requirement
Study Tasks
- Brief Marbury v. Madison and identify the three-part holding
- Create a flowchart for justiciability analysis
- Outline the differences between advisory opinions and declaratory judgments
- Draft a one-page summary of the political question doctrine
Congressional Powers: The Commerce Clause
Week 2 of 14
Readings
Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1 (1824); NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel, 301 U.S. 1 (1937); United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995); Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005); Casebook Ch. 3
Key Concepts to Master
- Three categories of commerce power (channels, instrumentalities, substantial effects)
- Pre-1937 formalist era: direct vs. indirect effects
- Post-New Deal rational basis review for commerce power
- Lopez/Morrison limits on non-economic activity
- Aggregation principle from Wickard v. Filburn
Study Tasks
- Brief United States v. Lopez and compare with Gonzales v. Raich
- Create a timeline of Commerce Clause evolution from Gibbons to NFIB v. Sebelius
- Create flashcards for the three categories of commerce power
- Practice a cold call on whether a hypothetical federal statute exceeds commerce power
Congressional Powers: Taxing, Spending, and the Necessary and Proper Clause
Week 3 of 14
Readings
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819); South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987); NFIB v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012); Casebook Ch. 3-4
Key Concepts to Master
- Necessary and Proper Clause as implied powers
- Taxing power vs. regulatory penalty (NFIB test)
- Spending power conditions (Dole five-part test)
- Anti-commandeering principle (New York v. United States, Printz)
- Tenth Amendment as a limit on federal power
Study Tasks
- Brief McCulloch v. Maryland and extract Marshall's reasoning on implied powers
- Create a comparison chart: Commerce Clause vs. Spending Clause as regulatory tools
- Draft a practice essay on NFIB v. Sebelius individual mandate analysis
- Create flashcards for the Dole spending power conditions
Executive Power and Separation of Powers
Week 4 of 14
Readings
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952); United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974); Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998); Casebook Ch. 4-5
Key Concepts to Master
- Jackson's three-zone framework from Youngstown concurrence
- Executive privilege and its limits
- Non-delegation doctrine and intelligible principle test
- Appointment and removal powers (Myers, Humphrey's Executor, Seila Law)
- War powers and Commander-in-Chief authority
Study Tasks
- Brief Youngstown and map each opinion to Jackson's three zones
- Create a diagram of the appointment and removal power framework
- Write a practice essay applying Jackson's framework to a hypothetical
- Create flashcards on executive privilege doctrine
Federalism and Intergovernmental Immunities
Week 5 of 14
Readings
Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, 469 U.S. 528 (1985); New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992); Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997); Casebook Ch. 5-6
Key Concepts to Master
- Anti-commandeering doctrine (New York and Printz)
- Preemption: express, field, and conflict preemption
- Dormant Commerce Clause and discrimination against interstate commerce
- State sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment
- Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment enforcement power (City of Boerne)
Study Tasks
- Brief Printz v. United States focusing on anti-commandeering rationale
- Create a preemption analysis flowchart
- Practice a dormant Commerce Clause hypothetical
- Create flashcards for the three types of preemption
- Outline the City of Boerne congruence and proportionality test
Substantive Due Process: Fundamental Rights
Week 6 of 14
Readings
Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905); Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973); Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022); Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003); Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015); Casebook Ch. 7-8
Key Concepts to Master
- Strict scrutiny for fundamental rights (narrowly tailored, compelling interest)
- Rational basis review for non-fundamental rights
- Glucksberg framework: deeply rooted in history and tradition
- Right to privacy and its evolution through Griswold, Roe, Lawrence, and Obergefell
- Dobbs rejection of Roe and the history-and-tradition test
Study Tasks
- Brief Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health and compare its methodology to Roe
- Create a timeline of substantive due process from Lochner to Dobbs
- Write a practice essay on whether a hypothetical right qualifies as fundamental
- Create flashcards for strict scrutiny vs. rational basis frameworks
Procedural Due Process
Week 7 of 14
Readings
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976); Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970); Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972); Casebook Ch. 8
Key Concepts to Master
- Mathews v. Eldridge three-factor balancing test
- Protected liberty and property interests
- Entitlement theory (Roth: legitimate claim of entitlement)
- Pre-deprivation vs. post-deprivation hearings
- Due process in government employment (Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill)
Study Tasks
- Brief Mathews v. Eldridge and memorize the three-factor test
- Apply Mathews balancing to three different hypothetical scenarios
- Create flashcards for liberty vs. property interest distinctions
- Draft a comparison chart: Goldberg v. Kelly vs. Mathews v. Eldridge
Equal Protection: Levels of Scrutiny and Race
Week 8 of 14
Readings
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896); Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954); Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967); Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003); Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023); Casebook Ch. 9
Key Concepts to Master
- Three tiers of scrutiny: strict, intermediate, rational basis
- Suspect classifications and strict scrutiny for race
- De jure vs. de facto discrimination
- Affirmative action from Bakke through SFFA v. Harvard
- Washington v. Davis: discriminatory intent requirement
Study Tasks
- Brief Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard
- Create a chart mapping each classification to its level of scrutiny
- Write a practice essay on a race-based government program under strict scrutiny
- Create flashcards for the elements of each scrutiny level
Equal Protection: Sex, Legitimacy, and Other Classifications
Week 9 of 14
Readings
Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976); United States v. Virginia (VMI), 518 U.S. 515 (1996); City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, 473 U.S. 432 (1985); Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996); Casebook Ch. 9-10
Key Concepts to Master
- Intermediate scrutiny for sex-based classifications
- VMI exceedingly persuasive justification standard
- Rational basis with bite (Cleburne, Romer, Moreno)
- Sexual orientation as a classification post-Obergefell
- Alienage classifications and the public function exception
Study Tasks
- Brief United States v. Virginia (VMI) and identify the standard of review
- Compare intermediate scrutiny with strict scrutiny using a Venn diagram
- Create flashcards for quasi-suspect classification analysis
- Practice a cold call analyzing a hypothetical sex-based classification
First Amendment: Freedom of Speech — Content Regulation
Week 10 of 14
Readings
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969); Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992); Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 576 U.S. 155 (2015); Casebook Ch. 11-12
Key Concepts to Master
- Content-based vs. content-neutral distinction
- Strict scrutiny for content-based speech restrictions
- Unprotected categories: incitement (Brandenburg), true threats, fighting words, obscenity
- Symbolic speech and the O'Brien test
- Overbreadth and vagueness doctrines
Study Tasks
- Brief Brandenburg v. Ohio and Texas v. Johnson
- Create a flowchart for First Amendment speech analysis
- Write a practice essay on whether a hypothetical law is content-based or content-neutral
- Create flashcards for unprotected speech categories and their tests
First Amendment: Time/Place/Manner, Public Forum, and Commercial Speech
Week 11 of 14
Readings
Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781 (1989); Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association, 460 U.S. 37 (1983); Central Hudson Gas v. Public Service Commission, 447 U.S. 557 (1980); Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. 98 (2017); Casebook Ch. 12-13
Key Concepts to Master
- Public forum doctrine: traditional, designated, limited, and nonpublic forums
- Time, place, and manner restrictions (Ward test)
- Commercial speech and the Central Hudson four-part test
- Prior restraints and the heavy presumption against them
- Government speech doctrine (Walker v. Texas Division)
Study Tasks
- Brief Ward v. Rock Against Racism and Perry Education Association
- Create a chart comparing speech protections across forum types
- Apply the Central Hudson test to a hypothetical advertising regulation
- Create flashcards for the four-part Central Hudson test
First Amendment: Religion Clauses
Week 12 of 14
Readings
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971); Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990); Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. 507 (2022); Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, 593 U.S. 522 (2021); Casebook Ch. 14
Key Concepts to Master
- Establishment Clause: from Lemon test to Kennedy historical practices test
- Free Exercise Clause: Smith neutral-law-of-general-applicability rule
- Strict scrutiny when laws are not neutral or generally applicable (Church of Lukumi)
- Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and Sherbert/Yoder framework
- Ministerial exception and church autonomy doctrine
Study Tasks
- Brief Kennedy v. Bremerton School District and compare to Lemon test
- Create a flowchart for Establishment Clause analysis post-Kennedy
- Write a practice essay on a Free Exercise claim under Smith
- Create flashcards for the evolution of Establishment Clause tests
State Action Doctrine and Congressional Enforcement Powers
Week 13 of 14
Readings
The Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883); Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948); Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority, 365 U.S. 715 (1961); Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association, 531 U.S. 288 (2001); City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997); Casebook Ch. 15
Key Concepts to Master
- State action requirement under the Fourteenth Amendment
- Public function exception
- Entanglement/symbiotic relationship test (Burton)
- Section 5 enforcement power and congruence-and-proportionality test
- Thirteenth Amendment as applicable to private actors
Study Tasks
- Brief Shelley v. Kraemer and Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority
- Create a state action analysis flowchart
- Practice a hypothetical: is a private university's action state action?
- Create flashcards for the exceptions to the state action requirement
Review and Exam Preparation
Week 14 of 14
Readings
Review all major cases; casebook review chapters; class notes and outlines
Key Concepts to Master
- Issue-spotting across all constitutional law topics
- Connecting structural constitution issues with individual rights claims
- Standard of review selection and application
- Integrating multiple constitutional arguments in a single essay
- Policy arguments and counter-arguments for each doctrine
Study Tasks
- Complete a full practice exam under timed conditions
- Create a comprehensive one-page attack outline for constitutional law
- Review and consolidate all flashcard decks
- Identify your three weakest areas and review those cases and doctrines
- Form a study group and practice explaining doctrines to peers