Con law Flashcards
Explain the rule for the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the test for rational basis.
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that “no state shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This clause applies only to states and localities. A law passes the rational basis standard of review if it is rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest, a test of minimal scrutiny. It is not required that there is actually a link between the means selected and a legitimate objective. However, the legislature must reasonably believe there is a link. Laws are presumed valid under this standard.
Explain the rule regarding the Fourteenth Amendment, Section Five Enabling Clause.
The federal government may exercise only those powers specifically enumerated by the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment, Section Five Enabling Clause permits Congress to pass legislation to enforce the equal protection and due process rights guaranteed by the amendment, but not to expand those rights or create new ones. In enforcing such rights, there must be a “congruence and proportionality” between the injury to be prevented or remedied and the means adopted to achieve that end. Accordingly, though Congress may override state government action that infringes upon Fourteenth Amendment rights if the “congruence and proportionality” test is satisfied, its enforcement power would not stretch to prohibit a law that does not violate the Constitution. In other words, as there would be no constitutional injury to prevent or remedy, the proposed law would be both incongruent and disproportionate.
Give the rule for standing in federal court.
Article III, Section 2 restricts federal judicial power to “cases” and “controversies.” A federal court cannot decide a case unless the plaintiff has standing to bring it. To have standing, a plaintiff bears the burden of establishing three elements: (i) injury in fact; (ii) the injury was fairly traceable to the challenged action (causation); and (iii) the relief requested must prevent or redress the injury. Standing requires a concrete and particularized injury, even in the context of a statutory violation. The injury need not be physical or economic. An injury such as the invasion of privacy may be a sufficiently concrete injury in itself even when extensive damages cannot be proved.
The rule for when the federal court can have SMJ over a class action?
Diversity in a class action brought pursuant to Rule 23 will generally be determined by the citizenship of the named members of the class bringing the lawsuit. For certain class actions with over 100 members in which the amount at issue totals more than $5,000,000, diversity will be met if any member of the plaintiff class is diverse with any defendant.
- A corporation is deemed to be a citizen of every state in which it has been incorporated and of the state where it has its principal place of business. A corporation’s principal place of business is generally its corporate headquarters (i.e., its nerve center).
- An individual is a domiciliary of the state in which he is present and intends to reside for an indefinite period. Additionally, a plaintiff’s good-faith assertion in the complaint that the action satisfies the amount-in-controversy requirement is sufficient, unless it appears to be a legal certainty that the plaintiff cannot recover the amount alleged.
When can a class action be heard in federal court?
Class actions can be maintained in federal court, despite a state law barring class actions to enforce statutory damages claims, if the action is authorized by Rule 23. Rule 23(a) establishes four requirements for representative members of a class to sue or be sued on behalf of all members of the class: (i) the class must be so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable (numerosity); (ii) there must be questions of law or fact that are common to the class (commonality); (iii) the claims or defenses of the representatives must be typical of the class (typicality); and (iv) the representatives must fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class (adequacy).
The rule for none state actor in a con law problem.
The Constitution generally protects against wrongful conduct by the government, not private parties. A private person’s conduct must constitute state action in order for these protections to apply. State action is found when a private person carries on activities that are traditionally performed exclusively by the state, such as running primary elections or governing a “company town.”
The rule for when a court can ban speech in a traditional public forum
The First Amendment protects freedom of speech. Protected speech can include written, oral, and visual communication, as well as activities such as picketing and leafleting. The government’s ability to regulate speech depends on the forum in which the speech takes place. A traditional public forum is one that is historically associated with expression, such as sidewalks, streets, and parks. In a traditional public forum, the government may only regulate speech if the restrictions: (i) are content-neutral as to both subject matter and viewpoint, (ii) are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and (iii) leave open ample alternative channels for communication. Additional restrictions, such as an absolute prohibition of a particular type of expression, will be upheld only if narrowly drawn to accomplish a compelling governmental interest.
1) Explain the Dormant Commerce Clause
2) What if a state does discriminate against out-of-state commerce?
3) Explain the unduly burdened standard
1) The Dormant Commerce Clause is a doctrine that limits the power of states to legislate in ways that impact interstate commerce. If Congress has not enacted legislation in a particular area of interstate commerce, then the states are free to regulate, so long as the state or local action does not: (i) discriminate against out-of-state commerce, (ii) unduly burden interstate commerce, or (iii) regulate extraterritorial (wholly out-of-state) activity.
2) If a state or local regulation, on its face or in practice, is discriminatory, then the regulation may be upheld if the state or local government can establish that: (i) an important local interest is being served, and (ii) no other nondiscriminatory means are available to achieve that purpose.
3) A state regulation that is not discriminatory may still be struck down as unconstitutional if it imposes an undue burden on interstate commerce. The courts will balance, case by case, the objective and purpose of the state law against the burden on interstate commerce and evaluate whether there are less restrictive alternatives.
Explain the rule regarding regulations of speech in a traditional public form.
Explain the rule for regulations in nonpublic forums which belong to the gov.
A “public forum” may be traditional—those that are historically associated with expression, such as sidewalks, streets, and parks—or designated—those that the government has opened for public use, such as civic auditoriums. In such public forums, the government may impose reasonable restrictions on the time, place, or manner of protected speech, provided the restrictions are content-neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and leave open ample alternative channels for communication.
A nonpublic forum is essentially any public property that is not a traditional or designated public forum, such as government offices, schools, jails, and military bases. The government may regulate speech-related activities in nonpublic forums as long as the regulation is (i) viewpoint-neutral and (ii) reasonably related to a legitimate governmental interest.
