Con Law Flashcards
what does the dormant CC do?
prohibits states from discriminating against out of state business or unduly burdening IC
Test for dormant CC
State passes a law that is discriminatory in any way –> SS
State passes a law that is just a little burdensome, but not discriminatory –> balancing test where the court will weigh the burdens to IC against local benefits
if a question looks like a state is discriminating against IC, make sure to ensure what could apply?
the market participant exception (where the state is acting as a business, not a regulator)
ex. selling energy to consumers in the state
The Contracts Clause
state laws cannot substantially impair preexisting contracts unless they can pass some form of heightened scrutiny
(1. serve important govt interest
2. reasonably relate to a govt interest)
Interstate commerce is a federal power, but states can regulate subject to
negative implications of the CC (Dormant CC)
a state law burdening interstate commerce is valid if the state is a market participant. what does this mean?
state can favor its own citizens in buying or selling products, hiring labor, giving subsidies (tuition discounts at state universities to in state residents)
exceptions to Dormant CC (when state can discriminate against out of staters)
- state acts as market participant (can favor its own citizens)
- regulation is necessary to further important noneconomic state interests (health and safety)
States may regulate local aspects of interstate commerce as long as the local regulation does not conflict with, or is not preempted by, federal regulation and the regulation meets the following tests:
(i) the regulation does not discriminate against out-of-state competition in order to benefit local economic interests, and
(ii) the incidental burden on interstate commerce does not outweigh the local benefits of the regulation.
Large semi-trailer trucks use one of two basic designs of tires. There are some differences in the two designs of the tires, but both are deemed to be equally safe by independent testing labs. A state has enacted a statute banning the use of one of the tire types. The other tire design is legal and available for sale in all states. A trade association of interstate trucking firms has brought suit to have the statute declared unconstitutional. The state argues that no burden exists because the other tire design can be used in all states.
How should the Court rule on the constitutionality of the statute?
It is an undue burden on IC - unconstitutional.
. By not permitting equally safe alternative types of tires, which might be cheaper or more readily available, the state is imposing an undue burden on all trucking companies in other states whose trailers might at some time pass through the state
Under the Supremacy Clause, a state law that directly conflicts with a federal law will be held invalid. Even if a state law does not directly conflict with a federal law, it may still be held invalid if:
the law prevents achievement of federal objectives or it appears that Congress intended to preempt the entire field of regulation
procedural due pcess
the govt cannot intentionally deprive someone of life/liberty/or property without notice and an opportunity to be heard
examples where procedural DP required
-govt jobs but not at will employment
- public education
-real property
-govt benefits/welfare
you need to have a reasonable expectation of continued receipt
how will a court determine the type of procedural due process that is required?
(i) The importance of the individual’s interest that is involved,
(ii) The value of specific procedural safeguards of the individual’s interest, and
(iii) The government’s interest in fiscal and administrative efficiency.
Under the rules the Supreme Court currently uses regarding abortion, what is required?
States may regulate abortions at all stages of pregancy because the right to an abortion is not protected by the US constitution
even tho the right to vote is a fundamental right, when is the right to vote reviewed under rational basis standard?
Laws limiting voting to residents, resident voting limitation appears to be rationally related to a legitimate government interest
3 suspect classifications for equal protection purposes
what standard
1) race
2) national origin
3) alienage
Strict scrutiny
quasi suspect classifications?
What standard
1) gender
2) non-marital children
intermediate scrutiny
When is alienage a suspect class that is subject to strict scrutiny vs. rational basis?
SS: state and local laws on alienage
RB: federal law
what are the e exception to the general rule that state laws that discriminate against aliens are subject to SS?
1) when a law discriminates against alien participation in state government, RB is applied.
2) government positions being reserved for citizens (those that relate to self governance) = RB
2) when undocumented aliens are involved = RB
what positions relate to self governance and earn RB review?
police officers
probation officers
teachers
3 ways of Proving Discriminatory classification (need this to determine what level of scrutiny):
1) facial discrimination
2) discriminatory application of facially neutral law
3) disparate impact on protected class (makes it a crime to bus or carpool voters, that does not mention race on its face. But high impact on black ppl)
*THE LAST TWO REQUIRE A SHOWING OF DISCRIMINATORY INTENT)
strict scrutiny test:
is the law necessary to achieve a compelling govt purpose?
need compelling interest and the means selected are narrowly tailored because no other nondiscriminatory action would work.
intermediate scrutiny test
Is the law substantially related to an important government purpose?
RB test
is the law rationally related to a legitimate govt purpose?
commercial speech is only protected by the 1st amendment wen it is
- lawful and not misleading
2.serves substantial govt interest - statute directly advances that interest
- statute is not more excessive than it need be.
Even though fighting words are unprotected, the Supreme Court won’t allow fighting words statutes that are designed to punish only…
certain viewpoints (for example, prohibiting only fighting words that insult on the basis of race, religion, or gender).
true threats are/are not protected speech
are not protected speech -
what is required for a true threat
speaker must have had some subjective understanding that their threats were of a threatening nature (but recklessness is sufficient)
The government can limit rights of speech in a public forum (parks) only when there is a…
serious and imminent threat to public order (police are ABSOLUTELY unable to control the crowd)
speech meant to communicate an intent to place a person in fear of bodily harm
true threats
personally abusive epithets inherently likely to incite an immediate response
fighting words (unprotected speech)
The Supreme Court has held that businesses selling material that is sexually explicit, although not necessarily obscene, may be regulated through
land use ordinances designed to promote substantial govt interests (property interests)
to avoid strict scrutiny and be upheld, a governmental regulation of speech in public or designated public forum must be..
content neutral;
narrowly tailored to serve an important governmental interest
must leave open alternative methods of communication
To be valid, a time, place, and manner regulation of a limited public forum must be:
viewpoint neutral and rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.
what does viewpoint neutral mean?
it cannot permit presentation of one side of an argument and exclude the other side.
regulation that is neutral as to subject matter and viewpoint
content neutral
Despite the free exercise clause, if relevant a court may assess
the sincerity of a person’s religious beliefs
the first amendment free exercise clause prohibits
government from punishing conduct just because it is religious
a law is discriminatory relating to religion if:
1) not neutral on its face
2) facially neutral but by design, it targets religion
If a law is discriminatory against religion, what applies
strict scrutiny (the govt would need to show a compelling interest to deny benefits)
under the establishment clause, what is the test when no sect preference is involved?
1) neutrality/coercion (if neutral, no need to go further)
2) whether the action aligns with history
3) accords with intent of founding fathers
Govt action that prefers one sect over another violates the….. and what test is applied?
Establishment clause
Strict scrutiny is applied.
when thinking of freedom of religion, think of what 2 clauses:
1) Free exercise
2) establishment clause
Govt action is valid under the Establishment clause if..
it is religiously neutral.