4

Constitutional Law Prof. Ribble

Mar. 23 50—88
Pg. 19 [Tarble's] Case
Habeas Corpus raises the question
of the right to hold. The jurisdiction
of the right to hold. Custody is
essential— there must restraint.

Mar. 24 (writ 88—115) [Lake] Sec. 4.
(115—126)
Can an amdt. be unconstitutonal?

See caus 149 & 159
241—{263}272

Mch: Marbury v. Madison — Sup. Ct. has
right to declare acts of Congress
unconstitutonal.

Mch. 26. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425
Read → {Lu re Sherry,} Harris v. Tex et al. 55 N. Y. 421

What is the effect of declaring a
law unconstitutonal. I buy bonds
on faith of Sup. Ct. holding law valid.