Introduction to Constitutional Law: 100 Supreme Court Cases Everyone Should Know

Featuring co-authors Randy E. Barnett, Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Legal Theory, Georgetown University Law Center, and Senior Fellow, Cato Institute; and Josh Blackman, Associate Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law Houston, and Adjunct Scholar, Cato Institute; with Hon. Thomas Hardiman, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; and David Savage, Supreme Court Correspondent, Los Angeles Times; moderated by Ilya Shapiro, Director, Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, Cato Institute.

An Introduction to Constitutional Law will teach you the narrative of constitutional law as it has developed over the past two centuries. All readers — even those unfamiliar with American history — will learn the essential background for grasping how this body of law has come to be what it is today. The accompanying online video library brings to life the Supreme Court’s 100 most important decisions; the videos are enriched by photographs, maps, and even audio from Supreme Court arguments. More importantly, this multimedia work is accessible to all: students in law school, college, high school, and homeschool, as well as lifelong learners pursuing independent study. Law students can read and watch these materials to prepare for class or use the platform after class to fill in any gaps in their notes. Come exam time, students can binge-watch the entire canon of constitutional law in about 12 hours. Please join us to learn about this innovative project, with comment by a prominent federal judge and a leading Supreme Court reporter.

Want to find the Cato Institute elsewhere on the internet?

-

[buensomeritano]

Any statute in conflict with the constitution has no effect and it is as of the statute never existed. Get your facts straight about what is LAWFUL and UNLAWFUL and what is subversive activity done under color of law or official right. Stop dancing around what is lawful vs. unlawful with the specious arguments about what is constitutional vs legal. That is a fallacy. Nothing unconstitutional is legal. Subversion of protected constitutional rights and the criminal code is a felony. PERIOD. If a bill drafter and legislator(s) make, or attempt to make, a statute that causes harm, measurable damages, or deprives a right, a crime has been committed and subversive activity is evident, and they lose qualified immunity. An offense against the citizen is an offense against the United States, as they are "one in the same". Statutes are not law and are applied by men in their personal capacities, and they have strict liability. The making, application, or practice of law, that deprives a protected right or obstructs, delays, or otherwise hinders the administration of justice, by any party under oath, is subversive activity and an act of treason, and, where a common agency can be shown, to have colluded in or gained a benefit from the criminal colorable conspiracy, is subject to indictment as a criminal organization. You people are learned Officers of The Court and you are obligated to make proper criminal report of all subversive activity, under 18 US Code Section 4 and 2382, and now you have legal notice. Signed:/s/ CC 3/20/21

[damonteforney]

The reason (I believe) when it comes to flip flopping of constitutional vs unconstitutional is that you have some judges, justices, lawyers, etc. that are political stricken when it comes to interpreting laws. The laws are interpreted in a way that benefits whatever side they support.

[crud]

I’m a non-law student just interested. Thank you for posting.

[JustPlainRob]

"Prostitution is an economic activity. Marriage is not an economic activity..."

Uh, you've never been married before, have you?

[Donsxxx]

Lemme save you time….. buy the book. 15minutes in and I finally realized they were not gonna start breaking down the constitution. 😹

[gordonrichard]

Thanks CATO. The Constitution don't need to be re-written...It needs to be re-read!

[satyanarayanaparuchuru]

When people have more awareness about laws, future cases would be reduced due to legal awareness.Automatically court work will be reduced if cases are less

[CC]

25mins and you realize it's just the longest marketing advertisement by lazy boomers ever made. Nothing of substance in this video

[ladydragon]

The Justice department has become one big extortion racket.

[AECRADIO]

SUPREME COURT HOLDS NO POWER TO WRITE LAWS.
SUPREME COURT HOLDS NO POWER TO ENFORCE LAWS.
SUPREME COURT CAN ONLY OFFER OPINIONS AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A LAW, NOTHING MORE.

[Bongobuddconner]

I feel that Terry v Ohio took away the 4th amendment by giving law enforcement WAY too much power over the civilian

[determined]

As if the Judicial Branch still gives a rip about the Constitution

[gscop]

Nicely done ! I am 68 years old. Spent 40 years as a LE officer eventually retired as Chief of Police in a major Southern urban city/county. A couple of questions....Does your book discuss the seemingly erroneous position that All decisions by SCOTUS become "The Law of the Land" versus what the actual language of the Constitution ascribes to the SCOTUS powers, keeping in mind the lazy, cowardly, or feckless Law Maker's (Congress) seemingly perpetual abdication of Their responsibilities over a least these last 60 years or so?

[commiesareevil]

Congress and the Supreme Court have failed to follow the Constitution for so long they are very corrupt and are part of the deep state

[harleylady]

All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” Marbury vs. Madison 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 144, 176, (1803)
WE THE PEOPLE INHERIT ALL THE POWER
💯💯💯🙏🏻🙏🏻❤️🙌🏻

[joannthomases]

Ok, so people ran away from Britian and 'British Temple Bar' is our lawyers? Why? Is there another registry ? No state shall give license for any traffic court, what is this all about. Copyright laws, cannot copyright a name ? Anything? Why a Crown copyright to these people who ran from their control on berth certificates=commerce??? And commercial Religion, like for-given Christian name? In commerce? On berth bond? Religion, on commerce ? So, intelligence cannot, comprehend plain English. So, how does this all apply to, covenants, in bible?

[beatrizviacava-goulet]

The pledges needs to be changed ...to we the people not queeny monarchies ...and man law not the maritime laws no more ...transparency on syntaxes that are hidden from the public in contracts ...plenty there to start ...

[plumberpete]

This is why common law is the law of the land and constitutional law is the law of the sea (Maritime law)

[harleylady]

Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of
None of these “bans” “orders” “mandates” and “restrictions” are Constitutional and everyone upholding such are in violation of their Oath of Office to uphold and sustain the Constitution!

[janadanielletackett]

Well done! I am going to school to become a paralegal as we speak and after graduation next year, I plan to go on to get my JD. (God willing.) This video helped me immensely on a paper that is due next week as I was clueless on what case to use for it. It has to be one from my state, which is Kentucky, between the years 1995 and 2015. Thanks to this video, I found it. Something told me to watch it. Thank you very much. Very impressive!