Con Law Flashcards
Learn con law
Strict scrutiny
A law will be upheld only if: it is necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose.
Burden of proof on government.
Applies to fundamental rights and suspect classifications.
For suspect classifications, must show intent: Whether a law targets a suspect classification can be seen (1) on its face, or (2) in how a neutral law is applied, or (3) if the neutral law had a discriminatory motive.
Intermediate scrutiny
A law will be upheld only if: it is substantially related to an important government purpose.
Applies to quasi-suspect classifications (gender).
Rational basis
A law will be upheld if: it is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.
Burden on plaintiff.
Applies to all legislation affecting unprotected classes: disability, age, wealth, etc.
How to show a law discriminates against a suspect or quasi-suspect class? I.e., how to show that strict or intermediate scrutiny should be applied in the first place?
To apply strict or intermediate scrutiny, P must show INTENT to discriminate. Shown by:
(1) the law is facially discriminatory
(2) the facially neutral law is applied in a discriminatory manner
(3) there is a discriminatory motive behind the law (hard to prove and discriminatory results alone are not enough).
Affirmative action or “benign” government discrimination
Also triggers strict scrutiny.
A government act to remedy past discrimination will be upheld only if it is necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose. Remedying past discrimination is a compelling government purpose. But the discrimination must be persistent and identifiable, and not merely “society-wide.”
Federal versus state/local alienage classifications
When state or local government discriminates against aliens, apply strict scrutiny. The classification must be necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose.
When federal government discriminates against aliens, apply rational basis (because of Congress’s plenary power over aliens).
Level of scrutiny for state/local alienage classifications
Default rule: apply strict scrutiny. The classification must be necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose.
But for democratic/civic purposes, rational basis (teachers, police officers, running for public office, etc.).
Level of scrutiny for gender classifications
Intermediate scrutiny: the classification must be substantially related to an important government purpose. PLUS exceedingly persuasive justification.
Level of scrutiny for race classifications
Strict scrutiny: the classification must be necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose.
Level of scrutiny for alienage classifications
Strict scrutiny: the classification must be necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose.
Level of scrutiny for legitimacy of children classifications
Intermediate scrutiny: the classification must be substantially related to an important government purpose.
Level of scrutiny for age classifications
Rational basis
Level of scrutiny for wealth classifications
Rational basis
Level of scrutiny for disability classifications
Rational basis
Level of scrutiny for national origin classifications
Strict scrutiny: the classification must be necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose.
Level of scrutiny for laws interfering with fundamental rights
Strict scrutiny: the law must be necessary to protect a compelling government interest AND no less restrictive means to achieve this goal.
List of fundamental privacy rights
Marriage, contraceptives, procreation, abortion (pre-viability no undue burdens), parenting
List of fundamental rights
Privacy, vote, travel
Level of scrutiny re: content-neutral speech regulations
A type of intermediate scrutiny: the regulations must serve important government interests unrelated to the suppression of speech, and must be narrowly tailored.
Overbroad speech regulations
A speech regulation is overbroad if it punishes a substantial amount of protected speech in addition to its legitimate sweep. Overbroad speech regulations are facially invalid and may not be enforced against anyone.
Discretion re: speech regulations
A speech regulation that gives unfettered discretion in its implementation is facially invalid.
To be upheld, the regulations must have clearly defined standards.
Public forum definition
Public property that is historically open to speech activities. Streets, sidewalks, parks.
Designated public forum definition
Public property that is open to the public on a limited basis. Schools rooms open for community activities.
Permissible conduct regulations in public forums and designated public forums
Government may implement time/place/manner restrictions that:
(1) are content-neutral
(2) are narrowly tailored to serve important government interests (but need NOT be least restrictive means)
(3) leave open alternative channels of communication.
Important government interests, e.g., peace and quiet, etc.
Limited public forums
Public property that is not historically open to speech activities but temporarily opened for that purpose. E.g., school gym open for political debate.
Speech regulations are allowed to reserve the forum for its intended use, and must be (1) viewpoint neutral and (2) reasonably related to a legitimate government purpose.
Nonpublic forums
Government property that is not historically open to speech activities and not held open for speech activities. E.g., military bases, sidewalks outside post offices.
Speech regulations are allowed to reserve the forum for its intended use, and must be (1) viewpoint neutral and (2) reasonably related to a legitimate government purpose.
List of general categories of unprotected speech (i.e., the government has a compelling interest in preventing the following forms of speech).
Inciting illegal acts, fighting words, obscenity, some defamation, some commercial speech
Regulations re: commercial speech
Default rule: Commercial speech is afforded 1st Am protection.
But government can outlaw commercial speech that proposes illegal activity or is misleading/fraudulent.
Any other commercial speech regulation must:
(1) serve a substantial government interest,
(2) directly advance that interest, AND
(3) be narrowly tailored (least restrictive means NOT required).
Regulations re: prior restraints
A prior restraint will only be allowed if it is to prevent a “special societal harm.” The government has burden to show this.
The procedure of the restraint must:
(1) have narrowly drawn, reasonable, and definite standards,
(2) require a prompt injunction, AND
(3) require a prompt and final determination of the restraint.
Test re: government employee speech not pursuant to official duties
Matter of public concern versus not:
If the speech was on a matter of public concern, there is a balancing of individual speech rights to employer rights to have efficient service.
If the speech was NOT on a matter of public concern and disruptive, highly deferential to government employer in having an efficient work environment.
Test re: government employee speech pursuant to official duty
If an employee makes speech on the job and pursuant to official duties, the employer may punish the employee.
Does not matter whether matter of public concern.