Mugler v. Kansas

Question 1

Facts of the Case

Answer 1

• Kansas amended its constitution to prohibit alcohol
  
  • except for medicinal purposes
  • the legislature passed a law to implement the amendment
• Peter Mugler had just built a brewery in Salina Kansas
  
  • He spent 10,000 on the new brewery’s construction
  • the design of Mugler’s facility allegedly made it difficult to repurpose for other activity, dropping the value of the building to only 2500
  • convicted of operating a public nuisance

Question 2

Issues at hand

Answer 2

• Whether a state law banning the manufacture and sale of alcohol, both within a state and across lines violates….
  
  • the privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment
  • due process clause of the 14th amendment
  • the takings clause of 5th amended in 14th amendment
  • commerce class

Question 3

Language of Clauses (takings clause) + due process

Answer 3

• No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law
  
  • section 1 of the 14th amendment
• Nor shall private property be taken for use without just compensation
  
  • Takings clause, 5th amendment

Question 4

Nature of state government power

Answer 4

• state government = authority to promote the health, safety, welfare and morals of people
• federal gov = enumerated powers

Question 5

Limits on Police Power

Answer 5

• what kinds of things states can police → regulations to help protect: health, safety, welfare, and morality
  
  • regulations must be reasonable → is the law fairly adapted to the end of a legitimate police power goals
  • means/end test similar toe the necessary and proper clause in McCulloch
  • Alternative is state is only acting under the guise of police power
• Most not intefer with the exercise of federal power
  
  • commerce clause issue → kansas brewers cannot export their brewes across state lines = might get in the way of congresses law of facilitating transport across state liens
  • but what if congress has o national policy regarding alcohol
• Must not intefer with individual rights
  
  • substantive due process/prvieldges or immunities

Question 6

Privileges and immunities

Answer 6

• Rights to
  
  • live in and travel through states
  • the right to sue in courts
  • the right to acquire, posses, and dispose of property
    
    • the right to use property is different
• has to due with buying, possessing, and selling → how you use it = completely different
  
  • this is why the privileges and immunities issue = is not relevant → can buy it, and can sell it→ just cannot use it in the way he wants to
• this clause = under developed part of the constitution in comparison to due process + equal protection clauses

Question 7

What does due process mean

Answer 7

• guaranteed fair procedures → procedural due process → the government must give an individual notice and ability to respond before life and liberty or property are taken away
  
  • right to appeal in criminal cases
  • example: before a new federal regulation can be issued there is a 30 day public comment period so affected groups and people can weigh in
• Substantive due process: even if given notice and an ability to respond →the deprivation of life, liberty, and property might still be unconstitutional

Question 8

Substantive due Process

Answer 8

• the origin of due process of law means that the states cannot act in violation of the law of the land
  
  • mentioned in manga carta → means the basic principles of life as a free englishman
  • implies a broader duty for gov to conduct itself appropriately even if its procedures are followed
  • the substance of a law is unconstitutional if it violates an individual right

In United States constitutional law, substantive due process is a principle allowing courts to protect certain fundamental rights from government interference, even if procedural protections are present or the rights are unenumerated elsewhere in the US Constitution

Question 9

Substantive due process claim/response

Answer 9

• if you want to get drunk → your right → not interfering with anyone else
• authority of Kansas gov = limited to Kansas → cannot prevent you from doing something if no knasas person is hurt → wanting to brew alcohol and take it across state lines = MUGLER’S ARGUMENT
• Person who might incure the most damage in this = is you however, once that bruewery affects the ability of your neighbor to enjoy themselves = state gov = steps in
• which situation is the closer to?

Question 10

Who Should decide if this connection exists?

Answer 10

• power = lodged in legislative branch of state gov
• belongs to courts to much lesser degree
• legislature identities what social problems need to be solved and how
• judicial restraint → by saying that state legislatures = primarily in charge, courts = reduced

Question 11

Police Power Justifications of Prohibition

Answer 11

• Public health, morals, and safety

- Sociological jurisprudence argument → a problem affecting the welfare of the people

Question 12

But the regulation isn’t reasonable argues Mugler

Answer 12

• you cannot drink and now cannot export beer to other states who do not have these rules
• Harlon’s response → comes down to that if kansas = authority to act they have the authority to be successful int making that action
• asserts that if the law had to allow an exception → the ability for the law to sucessed =would be undermined
  
  • assumes that lots of people would start to brew their own beer → drunkenness + bad behavior = prevail
• deference to states → giving states benefit of the doubt

Question 13

Commerce Clause

Answer 13

if congress has regulated something under the commerce clause states can’t interfere → mcuccoloch v. madison

Question 14

Dormat Commerce Clause

Answer 14

• but what if congress has no regulation on booze
  
  • dormant commerce clause gives states some power to regulate
• But court will not consider that question here because
  
  • nothin in the record indicates that beer was intended to be carried out of the state

Question 15

Takings Clause

Answer 15

• maybe kansas has the power to ban new breweries from being established but must respect the rights of existing ones
  
  • yes, brewign was legal when mugler set up shop but the state did not thereby give any assurance or come under an obligation that its legislation upon that value would remain unchanged
• Mugler’s property lost value because of prohibition
  
  • entitled to compensation under pumpell v. greenbay company → court said flood someone’s land to an extent in which it cannot be used it is unfit to be used + counts as a taking of property
• Harlon’s response → Taking clause not implicated here
  
  • pumplell was a taking only because the flooding was permanent and a physical invasion of someone’s land by the state, and land became repurposed to something used by the public = navigable waterway
  • Mugler by contrast still has beer manufacturing equipment → just cannot use it