Constitutional Law Flashcards
I. Procedural Issues
Standing
Plaint must demonstrate that he has suffered an:
- Injury in fact
- That was caused by the government; and
- A ruling by the court will redress that injury;
- Must have concrete stake in the outcome.
Association Standing
An organization has standing to bring suit on behalf of its members when its members would:
- Have standing to sue in their own right
- The interests it seeks to protect are related to the organization’s purpose; and
- Individual member participation is not required.
Third Party Standing
Generally barred but allowed when would be difficult for the third persons to assert their own rights or if a special relationship exists.
Ripeness
Plaintiff is trying to bring a suit before injury has occurred, Federal Court will not hear the case unless the plaintiff has been harmed or immediate threat of harm.
Mootness
A case where the dispute has ended or was resolved before the review is considered moot.
State Action
Because the US Constitution only prohibits governmental infringement of constitutional rights, the litigant must show the action is attributable to the state, which includes government agencies and officials acting under the color of state law.
11th Amendment
Bars a citizen of one state from suing another state without its consent in Federal Court.
Supremacy Clause
If the federal preempts state law, the state law will be invalid under the Supremacy Clause.
II. Commerce Clause
1. Federal Commerce Clause - Article 1 Section 8
Article 1 Section 8 gives Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and several states, to assure the survival of a non-fragmented central government, and to prevent rivalries with the Indian tribes.
Regulate Channels of Interest Commerce (Gibbons v. Oden)
Commerce was defined as a plenary, including all commercial intercourse involving more states than one regulating the channels of interstate commerce.
National/Cumulative Economic Effect
Any national/cumulative economic effect on commerce is sufficient, whether direct or indirect, whether it involves manufacture or transportation, it may be completely intrastate, and it may occur before or after goods are shipped. Regulate the instrumentalities of interstate commerce and persons and things in interstate commerce.
Regulate Activities Substantially Effect Interstate Commerce (Lopez Limitation)
The court can conceive of a rational basis on which Congress could conclude that the activity in aggregate substantially affects interstate commerce. However, if the regulated intrastate activity is noncommercial and noneconomic, it cannot be regulated unless Congress can factually show a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce (Lopez/Morrison).
Modernly - Broad Power
Have treated commerce clause almost like a “Federal Police Power”, permitting congress to prevent almost any interstate activity deemed adverse to public health and welfare.
Argue the facts of the hypothetical - Feds vs State
Feds will argue - Commerce power extends to any issue substantially affecting interstate commerce. The necessary and proper clause can be used as a means of effectuating their goals.
States will argue - A strict interpretation of the 10th Amendment to particularly the areas of health, safety, morals, welfare, and activity does not substantially affect IC.
Necessary and Proper Clause
The necessary and proper clause grants congress the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution any power granted to any branch of the federal government.
State - 10th Amendment
The federal government may not compel the States to enforce or administer a federal regulatory program.
New York v. U.S.
Under the 10th Amendment, Congress exceeded its constitutional power when it enacted a key law aimed at forcing states to dispose of low-level radioactive waste generated within their borders because it directed a state to regulate in a manner dictated by the federal government.
III. Dormant Commerce Clause
A state may regulate an area of interstate commerce if Congress has not enacted laws so long as its statutes do not:
- Discriminate against out-of-state commerce, or
- Unduly Burden Interstate Commerce
- Article 1 Sec/8 Concurrent Power/10th Amendment
Article 1 Sec 8 gives congress power but not exclusive power. States have concurrent power through the 10th Amendment to regulate in ways that affect interstate commerce. Thus, an objection to state authority rests entirely on the Dormant Commerce Clause.
Discriminate Against Out-of-State Commerce
A state law discriminates against out-of-state commerce if it protects local economic interests at the expense of out-of-state competition. If a statute is discriminatory, the state may be valid if:
- It furthers an important noneconomic state interest, and
- there are no reasonable, nondiscriminatory alternatives.
Important Noneconomic State Interest
The state has an important interest in protecting the health, safety, and welfare of State Citizens.
a. Issue - Does state law violate the Constitution by infringing upon Congressional Commerce Power?
B. Principle - Federal Commerce Power, although unexercised by Congress, may by its force inhibit state regulatory power.
If State Law discriminates against out-of-state competition, it is invalid unless:
- The law furthers an important, noneconomic state interest and there are no reasonable nondiscriminatory alternatives.
- The state is market participant; or
- The government action involve is typically performance of a traditional government function.
Exceptions: Market Participant Exception
Nothing in the Commerce Clause forbids a state from participating in the market and exercising the right to favor its own citizens over others.
Maine v. Taylor
A. Need reason to treat instate articles of commerce different from out of state articles other than their origin.
B. Purpose could not be served by available lesser discriminatory means.
- Congressional Approval of Discrimination
If a state regulation does not discriminate intentionally against interstate commerce, it is given great deference by the court.
a. If a state regulates even handedly (neutrally with respect to interstate commerce).
b. To effectuate a legitimate local public interest and
c. The effects on commerce are only incidental, it will be upheld
d. Unless the burden on interstate commerce is excessive in relation to the putative local benefits.
Factors to Consider
State Interest
- Health, Safety, Morals, and Welfare
- Natural Resources
- Local Concern
- Rational/Legitimate Interest
Effect on Interstate Commerce - Extent
- Discriminatory in nature
- Economic Considerations - Undue Burden?
- National uniformity (older approach)
- Effect on Commerce - Balance extent of burden on IC against state’s interest in regulation.
- Alternative means.
The Doctrine of Alternative Means
If state has a strong interest which can be accomplished by alternative means with less burden on commerce, the law will be held invalid.
Preemption Doctrine
Federal Power
Article VI states the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance of it are to be the supreme law of the land and superior to any state law or constitutional provision in conflict with them.
Preemption
Expressed Preemption
Means that federal rule or order contains a clause or provision expressly removing power from the states to deal with a particular subject, if so supremacy controls.
Implied Preemption
Means that there is no express language describing preemption and its limits, but the court must imply preemption from the intentions of congress, or the executive based on the nature and characteristics of the federal regulation. Three types:
Conflict Preemption
Occurs when it is impossible to comply with both a state and federal regulation.
Occupy Field Preemption
Occurs when Federal Law or regulation is so pervasive in an area that the comprehensive nature of Federal regulation admits of no alternative or supplemental state regulation - even those that do not conflict.
Factors to Consider - argue both sides (intent of Congress-key)
a. Pervasiveness of Federal Plan of regulation - degree overlap
b. Local interest/national uniformity
c. Similarity of federal/state interest
d. historical classification of subject matter
e. dominance of federal interest
f. importance of state interest
Effect
- If a good argument can be advanced that intent was to preempt field, then state law is invalid.
- If intent was that the state could supplement, then the state law must be validated under the 10th Amendment.
Feds - Minimum Standard/States Higher Standard
Federal rules may set standards (minimum). However, that does not prevent a state from setting higher standards.