Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

31 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
PQD test

(1) Constitution has placed decision-making authority in an another branch.

(2) Inadequate standards for the Court to apply (discretion), or

(3) Prudent not to infere
1. need for finality,
2. intrusion into policy making
3. respect for other branches
4. inappropriate expertise
5. consistency (no embarrasement)
Chevron test
(1) Congressional delegation to an agency

(2) Has Congress provided a clear law within the statute?
Yes --> apply law
No --> defer to agency interpretation (expertise)
Article I balancing test
(1) extent of agency court's power

(2) type of right being adjudicated
--> public right (A v. Govt): OK for agency court
--> private right (A v. B, common law, statutory):
1. based on statute --> OK b/c Congres created it.
2. based on common law --> NOT OK; encroachment of Art. III

(3) reason why Congress created agency court
--> efficiency, cost
(Const. + Prudential concerns)
(1) injury
1. concrete, not speculative
Lujan, Havens Realty

2. actual or imminent
Adarand (future harm OK)

3. particularized, not generalized

(2) czation
Warth (consequence of economics)

(3) redressability
Warth (no proof overturning zoning law would redress injury of would-be residents)

Adarand (type of relief sought affects redressability: damages v. injunction)

Prudential concerns:
Third-party standing
Associational standing
Third-party standing

Associational standing

Generalized grievances
No Third-party standing
Exception: Special relationship b/t holder of legal right and the plaintiff where the plaintiff is being forced to act as a vehicle for denying the legal rights of the right holder (doctor abortion case)

Associational standing
(1) One member of the association has standing
(2) interests of the association are germane to the association's purpose
(3) requested relief does not require the individual members to be before the court
--damages specific to individuals will require them to be before the court.
--injunctions usually OK for association

Generalized grievances
1. can be rectified through the political process
2. person with particularized injury from generalized grievance may still sue

Lujan (citizen-suit provision allowing anyone to sue too generalized)
Ex parte Young
(1) must sue an individual officer (the officer, acting illegally, is stripped of his official immunity)

(2) must seek only prospective relief (Edelman)

(3) must be a federal violation, not state (Pennhurst)

(4) must not impinge State sovereignty in a significant way (Coeur d’ Alene, quiet title hurting sovereign interest)

(5) the statute being sued under cannot include a “detailed remedial scheme” (Seminole)
Lopez test
1. Congress can regulate the instrumentalities of interstate commerce (the wheels)

2. Congress can regulate the channels of interstate commerce (the things)

3. Congress can regulate the activities that substantially affect interstate commerce
(1) Does the statute affect economic activity? (Gonzales)
If Yes, is there a rational basis to show that the aggregate has a substantial effect on I/C?

If No,
(1) Is the statute part of a broader regulatory scheme that requires the regulation of intrastate commerce?
(2) Does it include a jurisdictional element? (making it a channel)
(3) Are there any findings that suggest some sort of connection to I/C that the Court cannot see? (Morrison: Findings not enough)

-economocs=distribution, production, consumption,
-regulation of a noneconomic activity is constitutional if it is part of a broader regulatory scheme.
Conditional spending test
South Dakota:

(1) The condition must promote “the general welfare.”

(2) The condition must be clear on its face. (Theme: Political safeguards of federalism.)

(3) The condition should relate to the spending grant.

(4) The condition must not infringe on another constitutional provision.
Express Preemption

Implid Preemption (must still be expressed)
1. Field Preemption (Burbank)

2. Conflict Preemption
a. Physical impossibility
b. Impairment of fed objectives (Hines)

Presumption against Preemption
DCC analysis
1. Is the statute a nondiscriminatory, evenhanded application? (Exxon)
a. Does the statute discriminate against the commerce coming from out-of-state?
i. No --> Nondiscriminatory

b. Does the statute discriminate against ALL out-of-state participants?
i. Yes --> Discriminatory

2. If Nondiscriminatory --> deferential analysis
a. Burden on I/C must “clearly exceed legitimate state interest” and not just tend to favor local.
i. Cloverleaf (not exceeding in relation to burden; plastics still brought into state for other purposes

ii. Severe impact (Bibb) or burden on national uniformity (South Pacific Co.) may tip scale against statute.

3. If Discriminatory (Dean Milk) --> strict scrutiny

a. Was there a less discriminatory way of protecting the state interest?
i. Yes --> Voided

b. If no sufficient non-discriminatory way to protect interest.
--> OK (Maine)
1. B/L
(Youngstown majority, Morrison dissent, Chadha majority, Plaut majority, Schor dissent)
2. Balance
(Youngstown concurrence, Plaut concurrence, Schor majority, Chadha concurrence, dissent)
3. Judicial Review
Marbury, Cooper
4. PQD
Baker, Chevron
5. Jdx stripping
6. Control over Substantive Law
Klein, Seattle Audubon
7. Control over Original Jdx
8. Control over Final Jments
9. Standing
Lujan, Warth, Adarand, Haven's Realty
10. Eleventh Amendment + Exceptions
Ex parte Young
Wavier (Fitzpatrick)
Abrogation (Seminole)
11. Separation of Powers
Formalism (Youngstown—Black, Plaut—Scalia),

Functionalism (Youngstown—Jackson,

Historical Gloss: Youngstown—Frankfurter)
12. NDD
Schehter, Yakus
13. Leg. Veto
14. Appointments Clause
15. War Power
16. I/C
Lopez, Gonzales
17. Tenth Amendment / Anti-Commandeering
Garcia, New York, Printz, Alden, Testa
18. Taxing and Spending
Sonzinsky, South Dakota
19. Preemption
Gibbons, Burbank, Hines
20. DCC
Exxon, Cloverleaf, Bibb, Southern Pacific, Dean Milk, Maine
21. Subsidies
New Energy, West Lynn