Reference no: EM133236903

Marbury v Madison 

1. A federal statute requires the President to return personal property that has been wrongfully confiscated from a United States citizen at an airport security checkpoint. A U.S. citizen believes that her property was improperly confiscated and wishes to file a lawsuit in federal court seeking an order directing the President to return the property. The citizen files an original proceeding in the United States Supreme Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the President to do so, relying on a federal statute that grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to order mandamus against the President. The President files a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. 

Why will the Supreme Court dismiss the lawsuit?

Martin v Hunter's Lessee 

2. Concerned about the rising level of vulgar language in society, a state enacts a statute authorizing an individual who hears and is offended by a vulgarity uttered by another to sue the offender for damages in state court. Relying on this statute, Ned sues George, his next-door neighbor, after hearing George utter a number of filthy words while George was in his own driveway trying to fix his car. George defends the state court suit on the basis that, because he has a federal constitutional right to utter vulgar and filthy words while on his own property, the state statute is unconstitutional. Despite George's defense, the state's highest court affirms the jury's award of damages to Ned. George seeks a writ of certiorari from the United States Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of the state statute, but Ned, supported by the state, argues that the Supreme Court cannot exercise judicial review over the laws of a sovereign state.

Why is the Supreme Court likely to reject this argument?