Constitution Flashcards
Type of Justiciability
- Standing
- Mooting
- Ripeness
- Collusive suits
- Political question
When It is Issue of Justiciability
Not Rule
- whether particular plaintiffs can sue,
- whether the court can hear a particular case,
- sometimes when a plaintiff seeks to vindicate their constitutional rights or the constitutional rights of others
- the call explicitly asks you to discuss a justiciability issue.
- where parties seek a declaratory judgment,
- alleging the government conduct is unconstitutional,
- plaintiffs must show they have a substantial controversy with the government—in essence, does the plaintiff have standing.
- where constitutional rights are asserted as a defense in a civil case or a military court martial case
Declaratory Judgment
Plaintiffs must show they have a substantial controversy with the government – in essence, does the plaintiff have standing
Ripeness
Plaintiff asserts there is an immediate or imminent threat of harm (e.g., the threat of prosecution if the plaintiff sells a particular publication without government approval). A federal court will not hear a case unless plaintiff has been harmed, or there is an immediate or imminent threat of harm.
Ripeness thus requires the imminent threat of possible prosecution or harm. If there is already actual harm, the case is clearly ripe and there is no issue to discuss other than perhaps standing.
Mootness
The court will not hear the case because it is moot when the requested relief has been obtained, or it is no longer a realistic solution.
But, where a party likely will be subjected to the same action and again could not resolve the matter due to the short duration of the situation, the controversy is “capable of repetition and yet evading review,” and will be heard.
Controversy is capable of repetition and yet evading review (pregnancy, elections, divorce)
Type of Standing
- Individual
- Third party
- Organizational
Individual Standing**
A plaintiff must have standing to challenge a federal law in a federal court. Standing requires the plaintiff to show a particularized injury, causation, and redressability.
–
An individual plaintiff must show three components:
(1) a specific injury, greater and different from the injury all persons suffer because the government is engaged in unconstitutional action;
(2) a causal connection between the injury and the defendant’s action complained of; and
(3) a ruling favorable to plaintiff would eliminate the harm to the plaintiff.
Specific Injury
subrule in Individual standing
The plaintiff must show a particularized injury that is specific to the plaintiff.
—
Usually, injuries in fact involve a violation of a common law right (especially a monetary harm), a constitutional right, or a statutory right.
Causation
The plaintiff must show that the defendants conduct is causing the injury.
Redressability
The plaintiff must show that a favorable result will redress the injury.
Third-Party Standing
A plaintiff may assert the constitutional rights of others only if (1) the plaintiff has personally suffered injury; and either (2) third parties find it difficult to assert their own rights or (3) plaintiff’s injury adversely affects plaintiff’s relationship with third parties.
Organizational Standing**
use this rule to create overall organization of the analysis
An organization has standing to challenge action that injures its members if: (1) the injury in fact to members is sufficient to give individual members standing; (2) the injury is related to the organization’s purpose; and (3) individual members in lawsuit do not required participation because of the nature of the claim or the relief
Individual Injury of Members
Subrule - organizational standing
same as individual standing
To show individual members have standing, the organization must show:
1. a specific injury to the members, greater and different from the injury all persons suffer because the government is engaged in unconstitutional action;
2. a causal connection between the injury and the defendant’s conduct complained of; and
3. a ruling favorable to plaintiff would eliminate the harm to plaintiff.
11th Amendment
11th amendment generally bars suits against states in federal courts.
The only time the Eleventh Amendment applies is with a lawsuit against a state government or a state government officer.
However, if plaintiff claims remedy for equal protection / due process violations under 14th amendment – Section 5 of the 14th amendment overrides the Eleventh Amendment and permits a lawsuit against the state or state officers for damages. Thus, Plaintiff in such cases can seek damages against state or state employees
Only consider this issue if the lawsuit is brought in Federal Court against a state government or state officer.
Cases that 11th Amendment Bars
The following cases are barred by the 11th amendment if brought in federal court:
a) Actions against state governments for damages
b) Actions against state governments for injunctive or declaratory relief where the state is named as a party
c) Actions against state government officers where the effect of the suit is that retroactive damages will be paid from the state treasury or where state land would be taken away
d) Actions against state government officers for violating state law
e) Actions contesting immunity of sister state under that state’s law
Congressional Power
Congressonal power is specifically enumerated in the Constitution.
—
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution specifically enumerates powers of the Congress.
Issue for Congressional Power
not rule
Issue is rise:
1. if you are given a statute passed by Congress and
2. you need to determine whether Congress has constitutional power to enact the statute.
List of Congressional Power
not rule
- Commerce clause
- Dormant Commerce Clause
- Spending Clause
- Taxing Power
Commerce Clause
Barbri+ST rule
Congress has plenary power over interstate commerce (commerce among the states, with foreign nations and Native American tribes). Commerce Clause grants Congress power to regulate: 1) the channels of interstate commerce; 2) the instrumentalities of interstate commerce; and, 3) commercial activities that have a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce.
–
Congress has plenary power over interstate commerce (commerce among the states, with foreign nations, and with Native American tribes).
interstate commerce is:
1. channels of interstate commerce
2. instrumentalities in the interstate commerce
3. activities that have substantial economic effect in interstate commerce
Interstate Commerce
Interstate Commerce is:
1. Channels (roads, waterways, etc.)
a) whether the federal law regulates the channels of interstate commerce, such as the roads, rivers, and highways
2. Instrumentalities (trucks, buses, planes, trains, etc.)
a) whether the federal law regulates the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, such as trucks, boats, trains, cars, telephone and telegraph wires, and the internet
3. Substantial Economic Effect on interstate commerce
a) whether the regulated activities have a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce.
Substantial Economic Effect - economic activity
subrule - Interestate Commerce
The regulated activity must be economic in nature. The regulated economic activity may be local if, in the aggregate, it would have a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce or on movement in interstate commerce, alone or in combination with other activites. Congress has a rational basis to regulate an activity based on substantial economic effect of the activity.
Substantial Economic Effect - noneconomic activity and inactivity
If activity is non-economic and has historically been state regulated, then the Court will strike down the regulation or statute as not within the Congress’ enumerated Commerce power.
Inactivity cannot be regulated under Commerce Clause.
10th Amendment Limits on Commerce Clause
[Even if law is supported by Commerce Clause,] the federal law is barred by the Tenth Amendment because the federal statute seeks to regulate state government activities or officials through coercion or commandeering.
The 10th Amendment prohibits Congress from requiring states to act in a certain way, or coercing states to act in a certain way by over-penalizing them for refusing to do so.
Coercion
Coercion is when federal government requires states to act in certain way or else impose substantial penalty for failing to act.
In New York v. U.S., the Court struck down a requirement that states had to either regulate radioactive waste or take title to it.
Commandeering
Commandeering is when Congress requires state officials to act in aid of federal law without funding the activities.
–
the 10th Amendment prohibits Congress from commandeering state officials by requiring state officials to act in aid of federal law without funding the activities.
Spending Clause
Spending power is plenary, so long as it is for the general welfare. [But Congress cannot coerce state governments to do something by cutting off a significant amount of the funding unless Congerss is funding an entire program through the states.]
Congress may place a condition on states in exchange for federal funds if:
* The condition is unambiguous;
* The condition is related to the federal program (relatedness);
* The state is not required to undertake unconstitutional action; and
* The amount in question is not so much that the state is “coerced” into accepting the funds.
Condition v. penalty:
1. In South Dakota v. Dole, penalizing states that did not adopt the 55-mph speed limit by cutting off only 5% of the federal highway funds was not a significant enough cut to constitute coercion.
2. Still, if Congress is funding an entire program through the states, it can regulate the use of all the funds and condition the funds on certain requirements.
Taxing Power
Congress has plenary power to tax. The elements are:
1. Tax is valid if reasonably related to raising revenue or Congress can regulated the taxed activity; and
2. Tax should have geographical uniformity (the tax is imposed the same way wherever it is imposed)
Case law - In the Affordable Care Act case, the Court found that the penalty on individuals who do not obtain health insurance is a tax, designed to raise revenue to help fund the administration of health care under the Act. Thus, the Court held that it was a proper tax, and the individual mandate was upheld on that basis.
Dormant Commerce Clause and P&I of Art. 4th
not rule
A. These clauses are triggered by any kind of state or local economic regulation—state statutes or local ordinances
B. if the essay concerns state or local economic regulation (as opposed to federal regulation) that affects or impairs out-of-state business.
Dormant Commerce Clause
The Dormant Commerce Clause bars states from unduly burdening interstate commerce, which is the subject to Congress’ plenary regulation. A state or local law violates the Dormant Commerce Clause if it either: (1) discriminates against out of state competition to benefit local economic interests; or (2) is unduly burdensome on interstate commerce. A law is unduly burdensome if the legitimate local benefits do not outweigh an incidental burden on interstate commerce.
—
not stated rule
1. There are two parts to the test for whether a state or local law or regulation impermissibly burdens interstate commerce and thus violates the dormant commerce clause. A law violates the dormant commerce clause if it either:
a) discriminates against the out-of-state competition to benefit local economic interests
(1) please explain how those local interests are benefited, or
b) is unduly burdensome in that the legitimate local benefits do not outweigh the burden on interstate commerce.
legitimate local benefits under Unduly burdensome
Subrule #2
For unduly burdensome test, “legitimate” local benefits cannot include benefiting local commerce to the detriment of out-of-state commerce.
DCC Exception
There are four exceptions for DCC:
1. Furthering of Important State’s Noneconomic Interest
2. Traditional State Functions
3. Market Participant
4. Congressional exemption
Furthering of Important State Interest
A discriminatory state or local law may be upheld if it furthers an important non-economic state interest (such as health or safety), and there are no reasonable nondiscriminatory alternatives.
Traditional State Functions
A regulation that prefers government in its exercise of a traditional public function is permitted. Thus, for example, state law can require waste haulers to use a state facility over a private facility.
Market Participant
If the state or local body is a market participant, it may prefer its own citizens in its conduct of the business. However, the State’s conduct as a market participant cannot create external, downstream effects. Often, this offending conduct has amounted to hoarding local resources for the benefit of local businesses that treat them.
—
Note: directing market by regulation is not market participant; buying/selling is market participant
Privileges and Immunities of Article IV
This clause prohibits states from discriminating against noncitizens of that state as to fundamental rights, which is limited to the civil liberties, such as 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th and 6th amendments, and commercial activities, such as the right to earn a living. Corporations and aliens are not protected. The law that discriminates against nonresident in exercise of their fundamental rights may only be valid if the state has substantial justification for the different treatment.
—
This clause prohibits discrimination by a state against noncitizens of that state as to fundamental rights. In this clause, “Fundamental rights” are limited to civil liberties, such as those in the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments, and commercial activities, such as the right to earn a living. Corporations and aliens are not protected. A state law discriminating against nonresidents in the exercise of fundamental rights may only be valid if the state has a substantial justification for the different treatment.
What P&I of 4th Art Applies
subrule
a) Corporations and aliens are not protected.
b) If a business entity is not a corporation, but a sole proprietorship or partnership operated by persons, apply the Article IV Privileges and Immunities test
c) individuals
4th Art P&I Exception
A state law discriminating against nonresidents in the exercise of these fundamental rights may only be valid if the state has a substantial justification for the different treatment. State must show that the non-residents either cause or are part of the problem being solved, and there are no less restrictive means to solve the problem.
4th P&I
approach
a) Discuss whether the state violates fundamental rights
b) Then discuss whether or not there was a substantial justification.
Delegation Power
Congress may delegate its authority to administrative or executive officers with articulable and intelligible principle for the delegate to follow. Congress may delegate any enumerated powers except powers that is uniquely confined to Congress.
—
Congress may delegate authority to adminstrative agencies, or to executive officers.
—
1. Does Congress have the authority to regulate the subject of the legislation in the first place?
a) Applies to any enumerated power (see commerce clause and spending clause analysis)
(1) Usually this involves the Commerce Clause analysis, but any enumerated power, but Delegated power cannot be uniquely confined to Congress (i.e., impeachment)
(2) E.g., Congress can delegate the issuance of contracts regarding interstate commerce to an agency, but Congress cannot delegate its impeachment power.
b) Requires intelligible (articulable) standards for the delegate to follow
- Does the agency regulation conform to Congress’ legislation?
a) determine whether the regulation issued by the administrative agency conforms to, and is consistent with, Congress’ legislation.
b) Regulations that exceed the Congressional grant of authority are not permitted.
Delegated Power is Valid
Subrule - Delegation
Congress has the power to delegate its power except those powers that are uniquely confined to Congress.
Intelligble principle
Subrule - Delegation
A delegation will be upheld only if it includes intelligible standards, and delegations of extraordinarily broad authority require particularly clear congressional authorization.
13th Amendment
This Amendment authorizes Congress to pass laws to prohibit slavery, the badges of slavery, and involuntary servitude and authorizes to remedy private racial discrimination.
Can v. can’t do:
1. Congress may enact laws banning racial discrimination in private and public commercial activities and transaction such as housing sales and other commercial activities
2. Has not been held to apply to non-racial discrimination.
3. Has not been held to either act as a bar to, or authorize to other forms of “involuntary servitude” such as the draft or mandatory national service or prison.
Contract Clause
Generally, a state or local government may not substantially impair the obligations under private contracts [i.e., make it impossible to perform the contract] unless it is a reasonably and narrowly tailored to serve a legitimate and important state interest.
—
Law may not substantially impair the obligation under private contracts, unless:
1. Law serves a legitimate and important state interest and
2. Law is reasonable and narrowly tailored to promote that interest.
Govt Impairs Public Contracts - Standard
subrule: Contract Clause
When government entity that ultimately impairs its own contract with private party, court uses stricter view.
But if either the authorizing statute or the contract itself reserves the right of the state or local government to amend, revoke or modify the contract, there is no substantial impairment, and a state cannot be obligated to refrain from exercising its police power.
Legislative Veto
A legislative veto is an attempt by Congress to overturn an executive agency action without bicamerlism and presentment.
—
1. Bicamerlism (approval by both houses) or
2. Presentment (giving a bill to the President for signature or veto)
Line Item Veto
Action by President to “veto” appropriation after signing the legislation (line item veto) or to impound congressionally appropriated funds
—
Usually, this arises when Congress delegates discretionary authority to the President or an executive agency, so the delegation issue arises as well, and then tries to control the discretion by requiring the agency to present the action to Congress for final approval so that, if Congress vetoes it, the action does not go through.
This is unconstitutional because Congress’ veto is itself a form of legislative action, which needs to be authorized by both houses (bicameralism), and then presented back to the President for signature or veto (presentment).
The same issue arises if the President seeks to cancel a federal law or impound an appropriation of funds after the legislation has been signed.
Case Law: In New York v. Clinton, legislation that allowed the president to cancel an item of appropriation (the line item veto) was found unconstitutional since the President’s only authority over legislation is the veto power.
Supremacy Clause
The Supremacy Clause makes federal law the supreme law of the land. Under the Supremacy Clause, state or local laws that expressly or impliedly conflicts by a valid federal law, regulation, or executive order will be preempted.
Express preemption occurs when the federal statute expressly states it preempts state/local law. There are three types of implied preemption: (1) If the federal law and state law actually conflict; (2) If a state law interferes with accomplishing a valid federal objective; or (3) If it appears that Congress intended to occupy the entire field of regulation in that (a) it is significantly comprehensive in scope and (b) it creates an agency to administer the field.
—
A Supremacy Clause renders any state law in conflict with the federal law as void. A valid act of Congress or federal regulation or Presidential Executive Order supersede any state or local action that actually conflicts with it.
When governmental power belongs both to the federal government and the state, the Supremacy Clause renders any state law in conflict with the federal law as void. A valid act of Congress or federal regulation (or Presidential Executive Order) supersedes any state or local action that actually conflicts with it.
Type of Preemption
list
- Express - statute expressly states it preempts state/local law
- implied
* actual conflict
* state/local law interferes with valid fed objective
* fed law shows intent to occupy the field
Implied Preemption
There are three types of implied preemption: (1) If the federal law and state law actually conflict; (2) If a state law interferes with accomplishing a valid federal objective; or (3) If it appears that Congress intended to occupy the entire field of regulation in that (a) it is significantly comprehensive in scope and (b) it creates an agency to administer to field.
State Police Power
Field preemption subrule
In the fields traditionally within the power of the states – e.g., health, safety, and welfare – there is a presumption that preemption was not intended unless preemption was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress in creating that federal law.
—
In fields traditionally within the power of the states—such as health, safety, and welfare—there is a presumption that preemption was not intended unless preemption was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.
Presidential Authority
The Executive Power (to take care that the laws be faithfully executed) is vested in the President and such other executive branch officers to whom those powers are delegated.
—
Presidential Power is analyzed based on whether the exercise of power is in
1. Domestic affairs,
2. As commander in chief of the military, or
3. Foreign affairs
Domestic Affairs
To determine whether President’s actions in domestic affairs are valid, use Youngstown:
1. When the President acts with the express or implied authority of Congress, his authority is at its maximum and his actions are valid;
2. When the President acts where Congress is silent, the President can act if he does not encroach (take over power) upon another branch or prevent another branch from carrying out its tasks;
3. When the President acts against the express will of Congress, his actions are invalid.
–
Shorthand Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer guide
1. Express/implied authority of Congress - Acts valid
2. Congress is silent – Acts valid if no violation of other provisions of Constitution
3. Congress declines to authorize – Acts invalid
Commander in Chief and Foreign Power
As commander in chief, the President may act militarily without a Congressional declaration of war, but the limitations and requirements of notice to Congress and congressional authority to cut off funds under the War Powers Act have not been constitutionally tested. The President’s authority in foreign affairs is paramount.
—
Just be sure to distinguish between actual foreign affairs and military matters, as opposed to acts involving domestic affairs taken during times of conflict or war or interference with appropriation of foreign aid approved by Congress.
Appointment
It is within the President’s power to appoint ambassadors, judges, and US officers with the advice and consent of the Senate, but Congress may [according to Article II, Section 2] vest the appointment of officers other than ambassadors, Cabinet heads, public ministers, and judges in the President alone, his Cabinet officers, or in the courts.
Court Appoint Independent Counsel
subrule
Under Morrison v. Olson, Congress vest appointment power to the courts to appoint an independent counsel or special prosecutor.
Appoint Principal officers and Inferior Officers
subrule
The President has the authority to appoint:
1. Principal officers (Cabinet members)
2. Inferior officers (sub-Cabinet members)
Congress cannot appoint officers of the executive branch (agencies and commissions) or give the President a list of acceptable appointees
Removal Power
Kaplan
- Executive officials: The President may remove any executive appointee without cause (i.e., an ambassador or cabinet member).
- Executive officials having fixed terms: The President must have cause to remove executive officers who have fixed terms.
- Offiers with judicial or quasi-judicial functions. The President must have cause to remove officers who perform judicial or quasi-judicial functions (e.g., a member of the Federal Trade Commission).
- Federal judges: The President cannot remove judges, even for cause. The only way a federal judge may be removed is by impeachment.
- Congressional approval/removal: Congress cannot require the President to get congressional approval before removing someone; Congress cannot remove an official itself.
Takings - 5th amendment
The Fifth Amendment prohibits governmental taking of private property for public use without just compensation. [Just compensation is the fair market value at the time of the taking – not a future value.]
The only exception for takings is an emergency - there compensation is not required.
—
The Bar essays will only test whether an act of the government constitutes a taking, not whether the compensation is adequate.