Con law 1
Official Acts?
Presumptive immunity
- motive irrelevant
Cannot use evidence of official acts
Unofficial Acts?
Not Immune
What are the limits on Spending powers?
- general welfare
- must be a genuine choice
- must reelate to federal interest
- independent Con. Rights
Limits on taxing power
NFIB. Sebilus:
- excessive?
- Scienter reequirement?
- administered like a tax?
What can Fed government not force states to do?
-makee policy
- refrain from making policy
- enforce federal law
Concerned about discrimination against the LGBTQ+ population, the House of Representatives is considering an amendment to Title II of the Civil Rights Act, prohibiting businesses from discriminating against clientele based on sexual orientation or identity.
Assuming this law is constitutional, which constitutional principles empower Congress to regulate this matter?
a. Article I and the 10th Amendment
b. Federalism and Separation of Powers
c. Judicial Review and Judicial Independence
d. The Necessary & Proper and Commerce Clauses
d. The Necessary and Proper Clause
AUMF
Congress give authority to President to detain those in relation to Global War on Terror
Boumediene
1) citizenship and status of detainee and due process rights of enemy combatant status determination
2) Nature of sitees of detention and apprehension
3) Practical obstacles
Exclusive Constitutional Power?
Absolute immunity
Observing that early child development has significant effects on future life success and earning potential, Congress passes a law creating a national fund intended to pay for childcare costs for every child in the United States. This fund will require that children attend a governmentsponsored childcare center or for parents to submit proof that their child is enrolled in a childcare center. What is the Government most likely to argue in favor of its power to establish this fund?
a. Channel of interstate commerce
b. Instrumentality of interstate commerce
c. Substantial economic effects
d. General Police Power
C. Substantial economics effects
Observing that early child development has significant effects on future life success and earning potential, Congress passes a law creating a national fund intended to pay for childcare costs for every child in the United States. This fund will require that children attend a governmentsponsored childcare center or for parents to submit proof that their child is enrolled in a childcare center.
Is the Court likely to uphold this law’s constitutionality under the Commerce Clause?
a. Yes, because childcare is economic activity
b. Yes, because the government has a compelling interest in providing childcare
c. No, because the Commerce Clause does not allow the government to compel economic activity
d. No, because children are subject to intrastate regulation
C. No because the commerce clause does not allow thee government to compel economic activity.
Congress presents a long record of factfinding from experts, parents, and citizen testimony showing that children’s economic futures depend on access to childcare, as well as how this regulation would affect the existing nationwide childcare industry. Does this factfinding alter the Court’s analysis regarding the constitutionality of the law?
a. No, the test of the Commerce Clause is strictly whether the kind of activity regulated is interstate and intrastate, and childcare is intrastate
b. No, because the court’s decision on constitutionality will not depend on Congressional factfinding in this case
c. Yes, because substantial economic effects depend on magnitude of effect, not whether the effects are interstate or intrastate
d. Yes, because, after US v Lopez, extensive Congressional factfinding is required to demonstrate substantial economic effects
b. No, because the court’s decision on constitutionality will not depend on Congressional factfinding in this case
Concerned about discrimination against the LGBTQ+ population, the House of Representatives is considering an amendment to Title II of the Civil Rights Act, prohibiting businesses from discriminating against clientele based on sexual orientation or identity.
The House, aware of the changing opinion among the Justices, wishes to consult the Supreme Court about the constitutionality of the proposed statute prior to voting on the bill. Should the Court weigh in on the bill’s constitutionality?
a. Yes, as a matter involving public ministers, the Court has original jurisdiction b. Yes, because the Court represents the chief legal experts in the federal government
c. No, because the Court gives Congress completes discretion when considering appropriate legislation
d. No, because advisory opinions fail to meet the cases or controversies requirement of Article III
c. No, because the Court gives Congress completes discretion when considering appropriate legislation
Concerned about discrimination against the LGBTQ+ population, the House of Representatives is considering an amendment to Title II of the Civil Rights Act, prohibiting businesses from discriminating against clientele based on sexual orientation or identity.
Assuming the Court evaluates this law’s constitutionality, under current jurisprudence, what is the Supreme Court likely to do?
a. Uphold this legislation as a proper means for securing the necessary ends of protecting individual rights
b. Uphold this legislation as pertaining to commercial activity with a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce
c. Overturn this legislation as a regulation of activity for a noneconomic purpose
d. Overturn this legislation as existing outside the scope of the Commerce Clause, which pertains to trade and navigation across the several states
Uphold this legislation as pertaining to commercial activity with a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce
A state government passes legislation prohibiting private businesses from discriminating against clients on the basis of membership in the Church of Scientology.
If challenging this legislation in court, who is most likely to have standing in this case?
a. A state employee uncomfortable with prosecuting noncompliant businesses b. A newly formed company with no existing client base
c. An existing company fined for failing to comply with this law
d. An advocacy organization that seeks to promote business independence from all government regulation
C. An existing company fined for failing to comply with this law
A state government passes legislation prohibiting private businesses from discriminating against clients on the basis of membership in the Church of Scientolog. Does the state government have the authority to regulate this matter? (Ignore any potential First Amendment Issues)
a. Yes, this issue falls within states’ Police Powers
b. Yes, the 10th Amendment grants sweeping State authority
c. No, only Congress has the Police Power
d. No, only the Court can decide what is prohibited discrimination
A. Yes, this issue falls within States' Police Powers
Which of the following would be sufficient to overrule the Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment?
a. 2/3 supermajority vote in both the House and the Senate
b. Constitutional Amendment
c. Nullification of judicial orders by state governments
d. Presidential Executive Order
B. Constitutional Amendment
In the past, the Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that the constitutional right to free speech under the First Amendment includes protections for those involved in hate speech, so long as that speech does not incite violence. A state governor, disagreeing with the Court’s interpretation, issues an executive order to all public universities in their state, requiring that any enrolled student found engaging in hate speech be expelled immediately. What may the state governor do in this scenario?
a. Ignore the Court’s precedent, judicial interpretations of the text carry less weight than the Constitution itself
b. Ignore citing executive privilege
c. Comply with the Court’s precedent, so long as the rule also complies with the state’s own constitution
d. Comply with the Court’s interpretation of a constitutional right
d. Comply with the Court’s interpretation of a constitutional right
The federal statute pertains to the legalization of marijuana for homegrown personal use.
Does Congress have the authority to regulate this matter?
a. No, this is a violation of natural law
b. No, this is noncommercial activity
c. Yes, homegrown agricultural products aggregate to interstate commerce
d. Yes, because criminal behavior has a direct effect on interstate commerce
c. Yes, homegrown agricultural products aggregate to interstate commerce
A federal agency, citing eminent domain, has seized a plot of privately-owned shoreline to assist with building offshore wind turbines to fight climate change. A landowner, who owns land included in this claim, seeks an injunction to stop this claim. For over twenty years, Landowner has owned a four-acre parcel of land that abuts the shoreline Landowner was recently notified by the federal agency that his parcel, which was worth $1.6 million dollars at the time of notice, would be seized as part of its eminent domain action. Landowner has used his parcel as a camping site, as well as a way to launch watercraft used by his family for their recreational purposes. Landowner seeks an injunction to stop the federal agency from appropriating his land on the basis that building offshore wind turbines is not a proper public use.
Does the landowner have standing to bring this lawsuit?
Yes, because they seek a remedy for an injury-in-fact
A federal agency, citing eminent domain, has seized a plot of privately-owned shoreline to assist with building offshore wind turbines to fight climate change. A landowner, who owns land included in this claim, seeks an injunction to stop this claim. For over twenty years, Landowner has owned a four-acre parcel of land that abuts the shoreline Landowner was recently notified by the federal agency that his parcel, which was worth $1.6 million dollars at the time of notice, would be seized as part of its eminent domain action. Landowner has used his parcel as a camping site, as well as a way to launch watercraft used by his family for their recreational purposes. Landowner seeks an injunction to stop the federal agency from appropriating his land on the basis that building offshore wind turbines is not a proper public use.
A citizens’ advocacy group, whose activity focuses on private property rights but none of whose members have claim to the shoreline, joins as a co-litigant suing the federal government.
Yes, because their suit is a part of a claim where a co-litigant has standing
An individual is convicted for a crime under state law. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the individual argues that the state court failed to consider a federal statute that provides an affirmative defense to their conviction.
Does the Court have jurisdiction to hear the appeal? (Assume the federal law is constitutional)
Yes, because the appellate jurisdiction described in Article III includes cases in which a state is a party
An individual is convicted for a crime under state law. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the individual argues that the state court failed to consider a federal statute that provides an affirmative defense to their conviction.
Does the Court have jurisdiction to hear the appeal? (Assume the federal law is constitutional)
a. No, because Article III of the Constitution states that the cases involving the States as a party shall be within the Court’s original jurisdiction
b. No, because the individual does not have standing to challenge a state’s policy decisions
c. Yes, because the appellate jurisdiction described in Article III includes cases in which a state is a party
d. Yes, because the Supreme Court is the court of last resort for all issues arising in state courts
C. Yes, because the appellate jurisdiction described in Article III includes cases in which a state is a party
An individual is convicted for a crime under state law. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the individual argues that the state court failed to consider a federal statute that provides an affirmative defense to their conviction.
Why does the federal law supersede the state law in this case? (Assume the federal law is constitutional)
a. The Necessary and Proper Clause
b. The Supremacy Clause
c. The Interstate Commerce Clause
d. The Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction under Article III
B. The Supremacy Clause