Constitution Research
Jurisdiction
comes first.
A court must have legal authority before it may enter a binding judgment. Start by identifying the court, the source of its power, the subject matter, the parties, and the procedure that invokes that authority.
Read the cited authoritiesFirst Question
Has the court been given power to decide this case?
Subject-matter jurisdiction is the court’s authority to hear a category of case. Personal jurisdiction is its authority over a particular party. Venue, service, and procedural prerequisites can also affect whether a case may proceed.
A party may raise jurisdictional objections at different stages depending on the rule and jurisdiction. Not every procedural error makes a judgment automatically void. Read the controlling constitution, statute, court rule, and opinion for the particular court and claim.
- Identify the court.
Federal, state, municipal, administrative, and appellate courts operate under different grants of authority.
- Find the authority.
Read the constitutional provision, statute, rule, or ordinance said to authorize the proceeding.
- Read the posture.
Ask what the court was actually deciding: jurisdiction, a constitutional right, a criminal element, immunity, or another issue.
- Read the holding.
A quotation is not a holding unless it is part of the court’s legal decision on the issue before it.
Sixth Amendment
“To have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
In all criminal prosecutions, the Sixth Amendment guarantees the accused the right “to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.” Read the complete constitutional text before relying on any summary or citation.
Read the Bill of Rights 01Constitutional limits on judicial powerMarbury v. Madison
5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)Established judicial review: a law contrary to the Constitution cannot control a court. It also held that the Supreme Court cannot exercise original jurisdiction beyond the Constitution’s grant.
Read Library of Congress PDF ↗02First Amendment licensing and taxationMurdock v. Pennsylvania
319 U.S. 105 (1943)The appeal succeeded because the Court held that Pennsylvania could not require Jehovah’s Witnesses to pay a flat license tax before canvassing and distributing religious literature. The tax operated as a charge on the exercise of First Amendment freedoms.
Read Library of Congress PDF ↗03Unbridled discretion in permit lawsShuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham
373 U.S. 262 (1963)Held that a parade-permit ordinance, as authoritatively construed to confer unbridled discretion, could not support Shuttlesworth’s conviction. The decision addresses unconstitutional permit discretion.
Read Library of Congress PDF ↗04Willfulness in criminal tax statutesUnited States v. Bishop
412 U.S. 346 (1973)Explained that “willfully” in criminal tax statutes means a voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty. Good-faith reliance may bear on whether willfulness is proved, depending on the facts.
Read Library of Congress PDF ↗05Municipal liability under § 1983Owen v. City of Independence
445 U.S. 622 (1980)Held that municipalities have no qualified-immunity defense to damages liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It does not eliminate the distinct immunities that may apply to individual officials or judges.
Read Library of Congress PDF ↗06Qualified immunity of executive officialsScheuer v. Rhodes
416 U.S. 232 (1974)Explained that executive officials may have qualified immunity, assessed by the scope of their duties, good faith, and the circumstances. The case does not establish that all officers lack immunity.
Read Library of Congress PDF ↗07Congressional investigative authorityUnited States v. Byers
273 U.S. 28 (1927)Addressed the federal government’s power to require a witness to testify before a congressional committee. It is not an unlawful-search-and-seizure decision.
Read Library of Congress PDF ↗ Reading Note
Jurisdiction is not a slogan.
Jurisdiction is a legal doctrine with different requirements in different courts. The authorities here are provided for study and verification, not as legal advice or a substitute for consulting the governing law and qualified counsel about a specific matter.