Individual Liberties 2 Flashcards
How Equal Protection apply to fed, state and local govts?
Application - how EP applies to fed., state, and local govts.:
- State/Local Govts: 14th Amend. EP Clause applies directly to state/local govts.
- Fed Govts: EP applies to the fed. govt. by incorporation through the 5th Amend. DP Clause (i.e., EP Clause does not apply directly to the fed. govt.)
- The same analysis and levels of scrutiny apply for EP analysis whether it applies through the 5th or 14th Amend.
What is the analysis to determine the application of EP?
Analysis - if you see anything that could implicate EP, ask:
-
Is there a discriminatory classification?
- To receive heightened scrutiny, a discriminatory classification must be proved
-
What level of scrutiny applies given the classification?
- Suspect classifications - strict scrutiny
- Quasi-suspect classifications - intermediate scrutiny
- All other alleged classifications - rational basis
- Does the classification satisfy the appropriate level of scrutiny?
How do you prove that a classification is discriminatory?
Three ways to prove a discriminatory classification:
- Law discriminates on its face - by its terms, the law treats classes of people differently
- Facially-neutral law applied in a discriminatory manner - law does not create a classification by its terms, but does so as applied (E.g., only men are arrested under an otherwise valid law)
-
Discriminatory motive/purpose behind law and/ or application
- Test-P must show:
- Disparate impact - the law has a discriminatory impact (i.e., it creates a classification); and
- Discriminatory purpose – law was enacted or maintained for reasons involving discrimination
- Demonstrating discriminatory impact alone is not enough; there must be some evidence of govt.’s discriminatory motive
- Test-P must show:
Classification list and review
-
Rational Basis
- Alienage, but only if classification:
- Relates to self govt. and the democratic process,* or
- ls a congressional action concerning immigration*
- All other - all other classifications not qualifying for strict or intermediate scrutiny receive rational basis review (E.g., age, disability, wealth, economics)
- Alienage, but only if classification:
-
Intermediate Scrutiny (quasi-suspect classification)
- Gender
- Non-marital children
-
Strict Scrutiny (suspect classification)
- Race
- National origin
- Alienage*
- Right to travel
- Right to vote
In which bucket of classification race or national origin falls?
Classifications based on race or national origin are suspect classifications reviewed under strict scrutiny
- Note- often arises on the bar exam in the context of classifications benefitting minorities, which may be upheld
Requirements for affirmative action to be valid
-
Numerical set-asides (quotas) - to be valid, requires clear proof of persistent and readily identifiable discrimination, which cannot be based on general past wrongs
- Quotas are unlikely to be upheld
-
Admissions - b/c student body diversity may be a compelling interest, educational institutions may use race or national origin as a factor in admissions decisions, but not as a defining criterion
- E.g., invalid to awards ‘‘points’’ to applicants based on race
- Universities must show that no workable race-neutral alternatives would assure the diversity sought
-
Public school integration - public school systems may not assign students to schools on the basis of race to achieve integration
- Generally, racial balancing is not a compelling state interest
What is Alienage? Which scrutiny applies to Alienage?
Classifications based on alienage (i.e., citizenship status) are subject to strict scrutiny review, although certain exceptions apply
What are the exceptions to alienage classifications as strict scrutiny review?
Exceptions - rational basis applies if the classification is:
-
Related to self-govt. and the democratic process
- Often arises where job applicants are denied govt. employment based on their citizenship status
- Areas where alienage classifications have been upheld under rational basis review:
- Voting
- Serving on a jury
- Working as a police officer
- Working as a teacher
- Working as a probation officer
-
A congressional law regulating immigration
- Congress has plenary powers to regulate immigration
- Note - undocumented aliens are not considered a suspect classification
Gender as a classification
Gender - int. scrutiny+ ‘‘exceedingly persuasive justification’’
- Gender classifications receive heightened intermediate scrutiny (i.e., they must substantially relate to an important govt. purpose)
- Additionally, courts often require an ‘‘exceedingly persuasive justification’’ for the classification
- Classifications discriminating against men are usually invalid
- Some have passed intermediate scrutiny (e.g., statutory rape laws applying only to men, aII-male mi Iitary draft)
-
Classifications benefitting women:
- Classifications based on stereotypes are impermissible
- Classifications designed to remedy past discrimination or differences in opportunity will likely be upheld
Non-marital children
Non-marital children (legitimacy classifications)
- Usually arises with intestacy statutes
-
Intermediate scrutiny- applies if a law grants benefits to all marital children but denies benefits to some non-marital children
- Laws that deny benefits to all non-marital children while granting benefits to all marital children are unconstitutional on their face
Right to travel, considerations (which test?)
Right to travel – strict scrutiny
- Usually arises when laws impede movement between states
-
Durational residency requirements- laws requiring some period of in-state residency to qualify for a state benefit
- Invalid residency requirements -1-yr residency to receive welfare; 1-yr residency to receive subsidized medical care; 1-yr residency to vote in state elections
- Valid residency requirements - 30-day residency to vote in state elections; 1-yr residency to get a divorce
Right to vote, considerations (which test?)
Right to vote - strict scrutiny
- Arises with laws that deny some citizens the right to vote
- The ‘‘one person, one vote’’ requirement must be met for all state and local elections
- For elected bodies, voting districts must be similar in population
- At-large elections - constitutional
- When all voters vote for all office holders
Free Speech, and protected speech
The 1st Amend. protects freedom of expression, including freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, and of association
- Protected speech
- Unprotected or lesser-protected speech
Protect speech considerations
Protected speech - where protected speech is at issue, the level of scrutiny depends on whether the speech restriction is content-based
-
Content-based restriction- strict scrutiny
- Occurs where govt. seeks to restrict speech b/ c of its content (i.e., based on the subject matter or viewpoint)
-
Content-neutral restriction - intermediate scrutiny
- Occurs where a govt. restriction applies to all expression regardless of the content or viewpoint
- Usually arises in the context of time, place, or manner restrictions and/or speech on govt. property
Unprotected speech considerations
Unprotected or lesser-protected speech - some categories of speech receive lesser or no 1st Amend. protection (e.g., obscenity, commercial speech, fighting words, etc.)
- If a restriction concerns a lesser-protected category of speech, analyze under the appropriate test given the category of speech
Speech of govt. property: What are the type of govt property classifications?
Speech on govt. property - public forum doctrine
- Special rules apply depending on whether the govt. property is”
- a public forum,
- designated public forum,
- or non-public forum
Speech in public forums
Public forums are govt. property that the govt. is constitutionally required to make available for speech (e.g., sidewalk, park)
- Regulations must be content-neutral
- If not, strict scrutiny applies
What is the test for public forum speech restrictions?
Test for public forum restrictions - to be upheld, the restriction must:
-
Be content-neutral
- I.e., only regulates time, place, or manner of speech
- If the restriction is content-based, strict scrutiny applies
- Be narrowly tailored to serve an important govt. purpose
-
Leave open adequate, alternative channels of communication
- Does not have to be the least-restrictive alternative
- Permit fees that vary depending on the type of speech are content-based and unconstitutional
Speech in Limited/designated public forums considerations
Limited/designated public forums - govt. properties that the govt. opens for speech, but can close at any time
- E.g., public school facilities for girl scout meetings
- The same rules apply as for public forum restrictions, but only apply when the govt. property is open for speech
- When closed for speech or restricted to certain types of speech, analyze as a non public forums
Speech in non-public forums considerations
Non-public forum - govt. property that can be closed to speech (e.g., military bases, airports)
- Test - govt. can regulate speech if the regulation is:
- Reasonably related to some legitimate purpose; and
- Viewpoint neutral
- Content neutrality not required- govt. can allow speech on some subjects but not others, yet if it opens speech to a subject it cannot limit the speech to only one view