A lot of debates on the Dope come down to SCOTUS cases and the “correctness” of the decisions both legally and morally. Today you have been appointed to unilaterally overturn 3 decisions that are still considered case law (so for example Plessey isn’t allowed since it was overturned by Brown. Another example would be *Bush v Gore *since it specifically is not precedent setting.) with no political repercussions I assume non-lawyers like me will tend to pick landmark cases whereas laywers may pick lesser known cases. Anyways, my 3:
Slaughterhouse Cases: A key componant of the 14th Amendment gone with a 5-4 vote. What I find unbelievable was that the 14th Amendment was written (and has been interpreted) to overrule *Dred Scott *in that state citizenship and federal citizenship are two separate entities, yet this decision relys on the old *Dred Scott *doctrine. Whether or not you agree with allowing illegal immigration, the fact remains that for many things there is no distinction between illegal immigrants, legal resident aliens and U.S. citizens. I blame that in part on this case.
NLRB v Jones & Laughlin: Although *Wickard v. Filburn *is the worst offender of Congress being able to use the ICC to regulate everything, it was this case that fundamentally changed the legal interpretation of the ICC.
South Dakota v. Dole: Congress can only act based on enumerated rights. While some may argue that the 10th Amendment was emasculated by *Grant v Lee *(1865), I would say that this case was the nail in the coffin for states rights. It basically allows Congress to exceeds its authority through legilation through pursestrings. It also made the overriding concern to be the “general welfare” and “federal interest” effectively eliminating the requirement that Congress legislate within their enumerated rights. The case at hand was drinking age but now it is education (NCLB), health care (Obamacare), and other. Basically, we would go back to the standard under Butler.