individual liberties Flashcards
state action req
to show a constitutional violation “state action” must be involved
State action includes action taken by the government and government officers at all levels (that is, local, state, or federal)
Still, congress can apply constitutional norms to private conduct by statute e.g. Thirteenth Amendment can be used to prohibit private race discrimination and commerce power
exceptions to state action req
public functions– the Constitution applies if a private entity is performing a task traditionally exclusively done by the government
entanglement– Constitution applies if the government affirmatively authorizes, encourages, or facilitates unconstitutional activity, state action exists
* the state must be “significantly involved” in the private entity; mere acquiescence by the state in private conduct is not enough
* e.g. gov’t leases premises to a restaurant that racially discriminates but no state action when a private club with a liquor license from the state racially discriminates
strict scrutiny
Under strict scrutiny a law is upheld if it is necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose
* actual goal
* means have to be neccessary to achive the goal aka no less restrictive alternative
* trigger = fundamental rights or suspect classifications
* BOP on gov’t
intermediate scrutiny
Under intermediate scrutiny a law is upheld if it is **substantially related **to an important government purpose
* actual goal
* Means chosen have to be a very good way of achieving the objective (but not the best/least restrictive)
* trigger = quasi-suspect classifications (e.g. gender, and legitimacy)
* BOP on gov’t
rational basis review
a law is upheld if it is rationally related to a legitimate gov’t purpose
* any concerivable permissible purpose; doesnt have to be acutal goal
* cannot be arbitrary or irrational
* trigger = Regulations that do not affect fundamental rights or involve suspect or quasi-suspect classifications (most laws) are reviewed under the rational basis standard
* BOP on challenger
procedural due process
Did the gov’t follow adequate procedures when it took life, liberty, or property?
Government negligence is not sufficient for a deprivation of due process.
* Generally, there must be intentional government action or at least reckless action for liability to exist.
Generally, the government’s failure to protect people from privately inflicted harms does not deny due process
* Only if the gov’t creates the danger/the person is in physical gov’t custody, does the gov’t have any duty to provide protection
substantive due process
Whether the gov’t has an adequate reason for taking life, liberty, or property?
what’s required under PDP
balancing test if gov’t has deprived person of LL or P:
* Importance of the interest to individual
* Ability of procedures to increase accuracy/prevent erroneous deprivation/Value of specific procedural safeguards of the individual’s interest
* Government’s interest in fiscal and administrative efficiency
takings
5th Am. provides that the gov’t may take private property for public use if it provides just compensation
types:
* possessory: gov’t confiscation or physical occupation of property is a taking
* regulatory: gov’t regulation is a taking if it leaves no reasonable economically viable use of the property
-Generally, regulations that merely decrease the value of property (for example, prohibit the most beneficial use) do not amount to a taking if they leave an economically viable use for the property
-Temporarily denying an owner use of property is not a taking so long as the gov’ts action is reasonable
PU = Reasonable belief it will benefit the public just compensation is measured in loss to owner using reasonable market value (not gains to taker)
contracts clause
No state shall impair the obligations of contracts
Applies only to state or local interference with already existing contracts
* Limits state or local gov’ts to enact laws that retroactively impair K rights
* never applies to fed gov’t
state or local interference with private Ks must meet intermediate scrutiny (special form)
* legislation that substantially impairs a party’s rights under an existing contract is invalid unless the law is a reasonably and narrowly tailored means of promoting an important and legitimate public interest
State or local interference with government contracts must meet strict scrutiny, especially if the legislation reduces the contractual burdens on the state.
privacy rights
right to marry, procreate, custody, keep family together, upbring children (for parents), purchase and use of contraceptives, refuse medical treatment –> FR so SS applies
private consensual homosexual sex –> unclear what level of scrutiny applies
abortion or physician-assisted suicide not FRs so RB applies
2nd Am.
The Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns in the home for the sake of security and outside of the home
State laws regulating guns are allowed only if they were a type of regulation that historically existed.
right to travel
Laws that prevent ppl from moving into a state must meet strict scrutiny
Durational residency requirements (req person live in state for certain amount of time to get a benefit) must meet strict scrutiny
Restrictions on foreign/international travel need meet only RBR
right to vote
Laws that prevent some citizens from voting must meet strict scrutiny
one person one vote must be met for all state and local elections
At large elections are constitutional unless there is a proof of a discriminatory purpose
right to education
no fundamental right to education
