Difference between revisions of "Cooper v. Aaron"
m (Ext. link) |
(Expanded) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''''Cooper v. Aaron''''', 358 U.S. 1 (1958), was a landmark case in which the [[Little Rock]] school board tried to stop [[school desegregation]]. In deciding this, the [[Warren Court]] established the notion of [[Judicial Supremacy]], | + | '''''Cooper v. Aaron''''', 358 U.S. 1 (1958), was a landmark case in which the [[Little Rock]] school board tried to stop [[school desegregation]]. In deciding this, the [[Warren Court]] established the notion of [[Judicial Supremacy]]. Specifically, the court asserted that the federal judiciary and the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] is the "supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution" because of one single line that was cited out of context from the [[Marbury v. Madison]] opinion. In the opinion of ''Marbury'', Justice Marshall wrote that ''It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is''. ''Aaron'' went far beyond the Court's previous assertion in ''Marbury'' however, that they merely had ''authority'' to exposit the Constitution. Rather, it asserted the Supreme Court had authority over the other two branches of government, which was unnecessary to the resolution of the dispute in that case. |
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
Revision as of 03:09, October 29, 2016
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958), was a landmark case in which the Little Rock school board tried to stop school desegregation. In deciding this, the Warren Court established the notion of Judicial Supremacy. Specifically, the court asserted that the federal judiciary and the U.S. Supreme Court is the "supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution" because of one single line that was cited out of context from the Marbury v. Madison opinion. In the opinion of Marbury, Justice Marshall wrote that It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Aaron went far beyond the Court's previous assertion in Marbury however, that they merely had authority to exposit the Constitution. Rather, it asserted the Supreme Court had authority over the other two branches of government, which was unnecessary to the resolution of the dispute in that case.