Marriage and Commerce

Suppose Congress passes and the President signs into law the following Federal Marriage Statute:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither the constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed or enacted to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."

Under this law, same-sex "marriages" recognized in the state of Massachusetts or any other state would not be permitted. Is this law within the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause on the theory that marriage is an institution that, as a class, substantially affects interstate commerce?

This Week's Assignments

Just to remind you, your assignments for this coming week are:

--Casebook p. 103-127 (McCulloch); Chemerinsky p. 237-247

-- Sebelius case: Casebook p. 174-196

We will discuss McCulloch and that first assignment on Thursday (our next meeting).

And on Friday we will be prepared to ask some questions about Chief Justice Roberts' critically important opinion in Sebelius first striking down and then saving the Individual Mandate and Obamacare.

Rules for Next Friday's Special Class

I was just given a list of rules that the Court has requested for our special visitor next Friday, as passed on to me by Dean Poser:

Please note these instructions that we just received from the court.   Please talk to your students about this on Thursday so there is no issue about it on Friday.  Also, it is important that you tell them that no one else except those registered for the class can attend and you need to look around on Friday to make sure no one else is there (except me).

Here is the note from the Court:

To allow the [Special Visitor] to be more open and candid in his dialogue with the students, [he] requests –

                  Laptops, tablets, and similar devices closed

                  Cellphones stored

                  No recording of any kind

                  No social media, Facebook, Twitter, etc.

                  No photographs

Chemerinsky On McCardle and jurisdiction stripping issues

I did not assign it, because it is too lengthy (30 pages). But Chemerisnky discusses Congressional control over Federal court jurisdiction on pages 152-183.

Again, I am not assigning it, but it is there if you want more of this issue.