Select a Chapter to start the court case quiz.
Court case: Sveen v. Melin
Gorsuch, in dissent, agrees that there are no impairments here but dissents anyway.
Court case: Proprietors of Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of Warren Bridge
In contracts, nothing can be left to implication.
Court case: Home Building & Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell
Emergencies can and sometimes do lead to exercise of state power.
Not laws affecting pre-existing contracts violate the Clause.
Why is there no impairment in the contract here?
The law generally furthers policy holder’s intent.
The law will generally not upset the policy holder’s expectations.
The policy holder can change the contract with the stroke of a pen.
all of these
Court case: Stone v. Mississippi
The power to govern is
the trust committed to the people of the government.
the trust given by the federal government.
the trust given by the state constitution.
Court case: Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward
It is difficult for the state to make its case because
Dartmouth is a public school.
Dartmouth is a private school.
Dartmouth is chartered by England.
none of these
Court case: Fletcher v. Peck
A repeal of a law
may divest the right of contact.
may change the terms of a contract.
may not divest the right of contract.
Georgia is restrained here from passing the law that would rescind the contract.
The rights of third parties must be disregarded in a contract.
The law is invalid because it usurps the will of the college for the will of the state.
The first question here is
whether the state has any power at all.
whether the contract is fair.
whether the state added a substantial impairment to the contract.
The end here was legitimate given the circumstances of the day.
The Court’s precedents argue that contracts affect more than the parties involved in them.
There is an exclusive privilege to the Charles River Bridge.
The Constitutional Convention
was clear about the construction of the contract clause.
was unclear about the construction of the contract clause.
was clear about when emergencies exist in the U.S.
If the Charles Company is entitled to relief,
it must only point to the contract here.
it must prove that the legislature meant to keep it the exclusive bridge.
it must pay for the privilege.
The Court knows that the state’s police power extends to
anything the legislature chooses.
only those issues laid out in the Constitution
nothing because of the 10th Amendment.
all matters affecting public health or morals.
The Court only considers the first question in the test because there is no impairment here.
Contracts must be understood in a limited sense.
The contract here can be impaired without violating the Constitution.
The Court finds that
no emergency existed here.
the government exceeded its authority.
an emergency existed here.
For Story, the state must expressly suggest a contract is not exclusive.
Georgia must follow the constitution as a state government.
If travel is left to one corporation
the contract clause will be rejected by the Constitution.
the state will be perfectly fine.
the interests of the people will be harmed.
Whether a contract exists depends on the authority of the legislature to bind the state and the people in that way.
The people may resume the lottery system at any time.
Lotteries are proper subjects of states’ police powers.
Rescinding the law here would be
an ex post fact law.
a legitimate decision.
within the bounds of federalism.
The incorporation here
was meant to be limited.
was meant to be rescinded when the Constitution was ratified.
was meant to last forever.
