Class 4: Economic Substantive Due Process - Jan. 22 Flashcards
What does the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV provide? (Q)
The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, also known as the Comity Clause, provides that citizens of each state are entitled to all of the privileges and immunities of citizens in the remaining states. This clause prohibits states from discriminating against out-of-state citizens without a constitutionally valid justification.
What is a fundamental right under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV? (Q)
For purposes of the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, fundamental rights typically involve civil or commercial liberties, such as the right to conduct business within a state, the right to own private property within a state, and the right to access a state’s courts. In contrast, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that there is no fundamental right to engage in a recreational activity.
Under what circumstances may a state deprive out-of-state residents a fundamental right under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV? (Q)
States denying out-of-state citizens fundamental rights must offer a substantial reason for the discrimination under Article IV’s Privileges and Immunities Clause. The substantial reason must go beyond the mere fact that the subjects of the discrimination are from another state. Instead, a discriminating state must show that nonresidents are a peculiar source of the evil the challenged law seeks to remedy. Once it has advanced this substantial justification, the state must then show a reasonable relationship between the evil that is exacerbated or caused by the nonresidents and the discrimination the challenged law imposes upon them.
What does the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibit? (Q)
The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits state governments from unreasonably interfering with the rights of national citizenship. The clause is interpreted narrowly to protect only a handful of rights, such as the right to interstate travel and the right to reside in any state.
What does Article I’s Contracts Clause prohibit? (Q)
The Contracts Clause prohibits state governments from enacting laws that unreasonably interfere with existing contracts by retroactively impairing the individual right to enter into and freely determine the provisions of contracts.
The Contracts Clause does not apply to the federal government. However, it is possible for federal government interference with an existing contract to violate a property interest protected under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
What is a public contract under the Contracts Clause? (Q)
A public contract is between the government and a private party. State government interference with public contracts is subject to heightened scrutiny under the Contracts Clause.
What standard of review do courts use in evaluating state government interference with a public contract? (Q)
A state law that impairs public contracts, i.e., those between a private party and the state government, is subject to heightened scrutiny. Under this standard of review, a substantial impairment of an existing public contract must be reasonable and appropriately tailored to support a significant and legitimate public purpose. States may impair contracts to meet social emergencies, and they generally may impair contracts to achieve goals within the scope of their police powers.
This is the same test that is applied to impairment of contracts between private parties. However, when evaluating impairment of public contracts, the courts generally are less deferential to the state law than in cases involving impairment of private contracts.
What is a private contract under the Contracts Clause? (Q)
A private contract is between private parties; the government is not a party to a private contract. Private contracts are subject to a lower level of scrutiny under the Contracts Clause than public contracts.
What standard of review do courts use in evaluating state government interference with a private contract? (Q)
Private contracts are subject to a lower level of scrutiny under the Contracts Clause than public contracts. Under this standard, a substantial impairment of an existing private contract will only be upheld if it is reasonable and appropriately tailored to support a significant and legitimate public purpose.
In contrast, the standard of review for public contracts prohibits any impairment (not just substantial impairments) unless they are reasonable, necessary, and appropriately tailored to support an important public purpose or to address an emergency or temporary situation.
For private contracts, what must a plaintiff show to establish that a state law violates the Contracts Clause found in Article I, § 10 of the U.S. Constitution? (Q)
For private contracts, a plaintiff can show a state law violates the Contracts Clause if it:
causes a substantial impairment of an existing contract and
is not reasonable and appropriately tailored to support a significant and legitimate public purpose.
De minimis or minor impairments of private contracts do not violate the Contracts Clause. However, any impairment of a public contract, even minor ones, can violate the Contracts Clause.
What is a substantial impairment of an existing private contract, for purposes of Contracts Clause analysis? (Q)
A substantial impairment of a private contractual relationship alters the parties’ contractual expectations in a significant way. Substantial impairment does not require total destruction of the parties’ contractual expectations. Similarly, state regulation that restricts private parties to the expectations they anticipated from the contract in the first place is not a substantial impairment. In evaluating whether an impairment is substantial, courts will examine not only the terms of the contract but also the extent to which the private parties have been subject to governmental regulation in the past.
