constitutional law Flashcards
potential issues with a free speech restraints (3)
*vagueness
*overbreadth
*prior restraint
considerations for government speech
*if the speech is within government control, viewpoint discrimination is allowed
*employees are not protected if speaking within the scope of their duties OR if speaking as a private citizen on a matter of public concern if the government’s interest in efficient functioning outweighs the employee’s 1A rights
are regulations on campaign contributions and expenditures allowed?
*contribution restrictions must be “closely drawn” to correspond with a sufficiently important interest (generally allowed)
*expenditure restrictions are subject to strict scrutiny
expressive conduct may be restricted when
*the regulation furthers an important government interest
*the regulation is unrelated to the expression
*the burden is no greater than necessary
what type of 1A restriction is presumptively unconstitutional?
viewpoint discrimination
exceptions (6) to the ban on content-based restrictions
*obscenity: about sex, offensive to the average person, obscenity is clearly defined, the content provides no value
*incitement: advocate for imminent force or illegality
*fighting words / true threats: advocates for an immediate breach of the peace or violence
*defamation
*commercial speech: for lawful activity (not false/misleading), restriction must be a reasonable fit (narrowly tailored/no greater than necessary) for substantial interest
*clear and present danger exists
types of free speech restrictions
*content-based: prohibits speech based on subject matter
*content-neutral: restricts the time, place, or manner of speech
types of free speech restrictions
*content-based
*content-neutral
when can speech be restricted in a public forum?
when the restriction
*is neutral on its face and as applied
*leaves open alternate channels of communication
*reasonable fit (narrowly tailored/no greater than necessary) for a significant/substantial state interest
*is content and viewpoint neutral
*otherwise subject to strict scrutiny (content-based)
when can speech be restricted in a nonpublic forum?
when the restriction is
*viewpoint neutral (but could be content-based)
*rationally/reasonably related to a legitimate government interest
types of religious clauses
*Establishment Clause: government must be neutral as to religion (can’t prefer one religion over another or religion over non-religion)
*Free Exercise Clause: freedom to sincerely believe in anything and to act on those beliefs
standard of review for religious clauses
strict scrutiny
when is state action that infringes on the free exercise clause not subject to strict scrutiny?
*generally applicable
*neutral on their face
*incidentally impact on religious conduct
five considerations for the establishment clause
*financial aid if the aid is secular in nature and purpose, and neutral as to religion if distributed among secular and religious institutions (e.g., tax deductions)
*access to public facilities must be equal
*public schools (prohibited vs. permitted actions)
*religious displays must have a generally secular message
*legislative prayers are acceptable
two privileges and immunities clauses
*14A: states can’t infringe on the privileges and immunities related to national citizenship
*Art. 4: no out-of-state discrimination preventing private job access
elements of taking
*taking property: modify, destroy, occupy, give to 3rd party, require specific use, cause total loss of economic value, eliminate property interests (ability to alienate)
*any conceivable public purpose
*just compensation provided
when does a regulatory taking occur?
the regulation
*substantially restricts the use of the property (totality of circumstances: character or nature of government action, economic impact on property, interference with owner’s reasonable investment-backed expectations) OR
*deprives the owner of all economically beneficial use (but possession retained)
types of prohibited laws
*Bills of Attainder
*ex post facto laws
*obligations of contract (can’t interfere with private contracts)
EP: protected classes for each level of judicial review
*strict scrutiny (presumptively unconstitutional): race, ethnicity, national origin
*intermediate scrutiny (presumptively unconstitutional): gender, legitimacy
*rational basis with bite: sexual orientation
*rational basis (presumptively constitutional): everything else
required proof for discrimination based on a protected class and related considerations (3)
discriminatory intent
*face of law
*application/motive: context and history, stats
specific instances where race may be implicated (2)
*public school segregation: de jure (by law) only
*affirmative action: race can no longer be determinative for college admissions
when can a state restrict noncitizens’ actions?
when related to participation in government functions (rational basis)
type of review for substantive due process
strict scrutiny
fundamental rights protected by substantive due process
*right to travel (but states can enact reasonable residency requirements to receive non-essential benefits)
*right to vote (severe/discriminatory and subject to strict scrutiny: racial gerrymandering and poll taxes VS. reasonable/nondiscriminatory and subject to rational basis: felons’ inability to vote and photo ID)
*right to privacy: to marry, to intimate associations, to contraceptions, to parental rights
*to bear arms (2A)
types of judicial review
*strict scrutiny: action must be necessary (narrowly tailored / least restrictive means) to achieve a compelling government interest (presumed invalid until disproven by government)
*intermediate scrutiny: action must be substantially related to an important government interest (presumed invalid until disproven by government)
*rational basis: action must be rationally related to a legitimate government interest (presumed valid until disproven by challenger)
considerations for procedural due process (3)
*is the threatened interest protected?
*is the threat intentional?
*if yes to both, what process is due?
interests protected by procedural due process
*life
*liberty: restrictions of fundamental rights
*property: must have a legitimate claim to the property, includes employment
factors for balancing what procedure is due
*individual interest at stake
*risk of erroneous deprivation using current procedures + probable value of other safeguards
*government interest: burden in providing the additional safeguard
when is a state responsible for the actions of a private actor
*was the private actor carrying out traditional government functions? normally performed exclusively by the state?
*is the state entangled with the private actor? mutually beneficial contacts? hard to delineate between the two?
*is the state facilitating or endorsing the private action?