Constitution Law Flashcards
State Action Requirement
In order to show a constitutional violation either by the state or federal gov’t the plaint must show that there are governmental actors.
State Sovereign Immunity
The federal government or another state may sue a state without its consent which the Supreme Court would hold original jurisdiction and also exclusive for the latter. Citizens are not permitted to sue states except with their consent and where a state officer has acted outside the scope of their authority and injunctive relief is sought.
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: (1) discriminate against out-of-state commerce, (2) unduly burden
interstate commerce, or (3) regulate extraterritorial (wholly out-of-state) activity. In analyzing the whether a state is discriminating the court will apply strict scrutiny such that the state must show a compelling, non-economic state interest to achieve the desired outcome and if the state is a market participant/
14th Amendment Equal Protection
The 14th Amendment provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The Supreme Court has held that such protections also apply to the federal government through the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment.
A law that is discriminating against people based on a class of people that is subject to strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny requires the government to prove the classification is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest or substantially related to an important government interest. While all other classifications would fall under the rational basis standard of review where the plaintiff holds the burden to prove there is no legitimate governmental interest.
1st Amendment Free Speech
The federal government, and the state governments through the due process clause of the 14 Amendment, cannot abridge a person’s first amendment right to freedom of speech nor censor all categories of speech nor engage in content-based discrimination among different categories of speech.
Time, Place, & Manner Restrictions
The First Amendment prohibits Congress from passing laws that abridge the freedom of speech, a protection that extends to states and local governments through the 14th Amendment. The ability of the government to regulate speech depends in part on whether the area to be regulated is a public forum, designated public forum, or non-public forum.
[Pick the forum that is being tested]
Government regulations of the time, place, and manner of speech in [pick the forum] are subject to intermediate scrutiny if they are content-neutral. Content-neutral restrictions regulate speech without regard for the content or viewpoint expressed. To withstand intermediate scrutiny and be constitutionally valid, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is content-neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and leave ample alternative channels for communication.
Unprotected Speech
An exception to the protections of the first amendment are “fighting words” or words that incite violence, defamatory speech, or obscenity (typically sexual activity or child pornography).
Exclusive State Powers
All powers not explicitly assigned in the constitution to the federal government are reserved to the states or people. Congress can encourage state action through taxing and spending powers but cannot command states.
Commerce Power
Under the Commerce Clause Congress has the power to regulate the channels of interstate commerce, the people and instrumentalities that work in the channels of interstate commerce, and the activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.
Takings Clause
Per Se Taking: Generally, a governmental regulation that adversely affects a person’s property interest is not a taking.
However, it is possible for a regulation to rise to the level of a taking, such as when a regulation results in a permanent
physical occupation of property by the government or a 3rd party or a regulation results in a permanent total loss of the
property’s economic value.
● Regulatory taking: Even if the ordinance does not constitute an occupation of the property by either the government or a third
party, it is still subject to a three-factor balancing test to determine whether the ordinance amounts to a regulatory taking. The
following factors are considered: (1) the economic impact of the regulation on the property owner, (2) the extent to which the
regulation interferes with the owner’s reasonable, investment-backed expectations regarding use of the property, and (3) the
character of the regulation, including the degree to which it will benefit society, how the regulation distributes the burdens and
benefits among property owners, and whether the regulation violates any of the owner’s essential attributes of property ownership, such as the right to exclude others from the property.
o (1) Economic impact—how much value was lost due to the regulation;
o (2) Reasonable expectations—the owner’s reasonable expectation of return on investment;
o (3) Character of the regulation—does the regulation impact a few owners or the entire community?
The Sixth Amendment
The Sixth Amendment guarantees certain rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you.
