Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
117 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Requirements for Case and Controveries |
1. Standing
2. Ripeness 3. Mootness 4. Not a political question |
|
Standing: Plaintiff must allege a personally
|
Suffered injury or an imminent injury for an injunction/declaratory relief
|
|
General rule is No Third Party Standing: 3 Exceptions
|
1. Certain close relationships (dr./patient)
2. Injured party unlikely able to assert their own rights (D can raise rights of potential jurors) 3. An organization may sue for its members |
|
An orgnization may sue for its members if (3)
|
1. The members would have standing to sue
2. The interests are germane to the orgnization's purpose AND 3. Neither the claim noe relief requires participation of individual members |
|
No generalized grievances (b/c no standing)
|
Plaintiff may not sure solely as a citizen or as a taxpayer to force government to follow the law
|
|
Exception to no generalized grievances
|
Taxpayers have standing to challenge government expenditures as violating the Establishment clause (very narrow - limited to money, not land)
|
|
Three exceptions to mootness
|
1. Wrong capable of repition but evading review
2. Voluntary cessation 3. Class action suits |
|
Political Questions
|
1. "Republican form of government clause"
2. Challenges to the President's conduct of foreign policy 3. Challenges to the impeachment and removal process 4. Challenges to partisan gerrymandering |
|
All cases from state courts and US courts of appeals come to the Supreme Court by way of
|
Writ of Certiorari
|
|
The Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction for
|
Suits between state governments
|
|
Supreme Court review of three-judge federal district courts
|
Immediately appealable
|
|
Final Judgement Rule prevents
|
Interlocutory review
|
|
For the Supreme Court to review a state court decision there cannot be
|
Adequate and Independent state law ground of decision
|
|
Eleventh Amendment bars
|
Suits against states in federal courts
|
|
Principle of sovereign immunity
|
States cannot be named as a Defendant in federal or state courts
|
|
Exceptions to sovereign immunity
|
- Consent (waiver must be explicit)
- Pursuant to federal laws adopted under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment - Federal government may sue state governments |
|
Suits against state officers allowed in what circumstances
|
- For injunctive relief
- For money damages paid personally (but not if the state treasury would be paying retroactive damages) |
|
Define Abstention
|
Federal courts may not enjoin state court proceedings
|
|
Commerce Power allows Congress to act through (3)
|
1. Channels of interstate commerce
2. Instrumentalities of interstate commerce 3. To regulate economic activities that have a Substantial Impact on interstate commerce |
|
Substantial Effect on interstate commerce for non-economic activity
|
Effect cannot be based on cumulative impact
|
|
Tenth Amendment
|
Limit on Congressional powers; cannot compel state regulatory or legislative action
|
|
Legislative action requires
|
Both House and Senate and presentation to the President
|
|
Legislative and line-item vetos common trait
|
Both are unconstitutional
|
|
What limits exist on Congress' ability to delegate legsilative powers
|
No limits
|
|
What limits exist on Congress' ability to delegate executive powers to itself
|
May not delegate such powers
|
|
Treaties
|
Negotiated by the President and effective when ratified by Senate
|
|
Treaty vs. state laws
|
Treaty prevails
|
|
Treaty vs. federal statute
|
Last in time controls
|
|
Treaty vs. US Constitution
|
Treay is invalid
|
|
Executive agreements effective when
|
When signed by the President and head of the foreign nation (no Senate approval required)
|
|
President has the power to appoint (3)
|
1. Ambassadors
2. Federal Judges 3. Officers of the US |
|
Congress' power to appoint
|
May not give itself or its officers the appointment power
|
|
President's removal power over any executive branch office is absolute unless
|
Limited by statute
|
|
For Congress to limit President's removal power (2)
|
1. Must be an office where independence from the President is desirable
AND 2. Cannot prohibit removal, only authorized to limit removal for good cause |
|
President's immunity from suit
|
Absolute immunity to civil suits for money damages for actions while in office; no immunity for actions that occurred prior to taking office
|
|
Executive privilege covers papers and conversations but must yield to
|
Other important government interests
|
|
President's power to pardon extends to
|
Those accused or convicted of federal crimes
|
|
Implied preemption: Federal law preempts state law where (3)
|
1. Federal and state laws are mutually exclusive
2. State law impedes achievement of federal objective 3. Congress evidences a clear intent to preempt |
|
Ability of states to tax and regulate federal governemnt activity
|
States prohibited
|
|
A state law that burdens interstate commerce violates the dormant commerce clause if
|
It burdens exceed its benefits
|
|
Analysis of a state law that discriminates against out-of-staters
|
- Does it burden interstate commerce?
- Yes: Is it neccessary to achieve an important government purpose? - Yes: valid - No: Violates DCC |
|
Market Participant Exception
|
A state/local government may prefer its own citizens in receiving benefits from government programs or in dealing with government-owned businesses
|
|
Two exceptions to a law that discriminates against out of staters not necessary to achieve an important government purpose
|
1. Congressional approval
2. Market participant exception |
|
Laws that discriminate against out-of-staters ability to earn their livelihood violate
|
Violates the Privileges and Immunities clause UNLESS necessary to achieve an important government objective
|
|
Privileges and Immunities clause prohibited from use by
|
1. Corporations
2. Aliens |
|
Full faith and credit so long as (3)
|
1. Court rendering judgment had jurisdiction
2. Judgment was on the merits 3. Judgment is final |
|
State tax systems may not be used to
|
Help in state business
|
|
States may only tax activities that have
|
A substantial nexus to the state
|
|
State taxation of interstate business must be
|
Fairly apportioned
|
|
Prohibitions on private race discrimination valid under
|
Thirteenth Amendment
|
|
Situations where private conduct must comply with the Constitution (2)
|
1. Public function exception
2. Entanglement exception |
|
Public Function exception
|
Private entity is performing a task traditionally, exclusivel done by the government
|
|
Entanglement exception
|
Government affirmatively authorizes, encourages, or facilitates unconstitutional activity
|
|
State action?: Government lease premises to a restaurant that racially discriminates
|
Yes
|
|
State action?: State provides books to schools that racially discriminate
|
Yes
|
|
State action?: Private school that is over 99% funded by the government fires a teacher because of her speech
|
No
|
|
State action?: When the NCAA orders the suspension of a basketball coach at a state university
|
No
|
|
State action?: When a private entity regulates interscholastic sports within a state
|
Yes
|
|
State action?: A private club with a liquor license from the state racially discriminates
|
No
|
|
Amendments not incorporated by the Fourteenth
|
- Second: right to bear arms
- Third: quartering soldiers - Fifth: grand jury - Seventh: jury in civil cases - Eighth: excessive bail |
|
Levels of scrutiny
|
- Rational Basis test
- Intermediate scrutiny - Strict scrutiny |
|
Rational Basis Test
|
- Rationally related
- Legitimate conceivable purpose |
|
Intermediate Scrutiny
|
- Substantially related
- Important actual purpose |
|
Strict Scrutiny
|
- Necessary
- Compelling actual purpose |
|
Burden of Proof:
- Rational Basis - Intermediate Scrutiny - Strict Scrutiny |
- Rational Basis: challenger
- Intermediate Scrutiny: government - Strict Scrutiny: government |
|
Deprivation of libterty occurs if
|
There is the loss of a significant freedom provided by the Constitution
|
|
Deprivation of property occurs where
|
There is an entitlement and it is not fulfilled
|
|
In emergency situations the government is liable under due process only if its conduct
|
Shocks the conscience
|
|
Standard of conduct for liability to exist
|
Governmental action must be intentional or at least reckless; negligence will not suffice for due process claim
|
|
Balancing test for due process
|
- Importance of individual's interest
- Government's interest - Ability of additional procedures to increase the fact-finding |
|
Level of protection for economic liberties
|
Minimal; only apply rational basis test for laws affecting economic rights
|
|
Takings clause
|
Governemnt may take private property for public use if it provides just compensation
|
|
Takings clause test (3)
|
1. Is there a taking
2. Is it for public use 3. Is just compensation paid |
|
Is there a taking (2 kinds)
|
1. Possessory - no matter how minimal
2. Regulatory - no reasonable economically viable use |
|
Just compensation measured by
|
Loss to the owner; not gain to the taker --> look for FMV
|
|
Limited application of the contracts clause
|
Applicable only to state or local interference with EXISITING contracts
|
|
Analysis where state or local government interferes with private contracts
|
1. Does the legislation substantially impair a party's rights under an existing contract
2. If so, is the law a reasonably and narrowly tailored means of promoting an important and legitimate public interest |
|
Level of scrutiny when government contracts are intereferred with by state/local authorities
|
Strict Scrutiny
|
|
Ex post facto laws in civil cases - standard for review
|
Only need meet rational basis test
|
|
Standard of Review - Privacy
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
Fundamental right of privacy found in
|
- Right to marry
- Right to procreate - Right to custody of one's children - Right to keep the family together - Right to control the upbringing of one's children - Right to purchase and use contraceptives |
|
Right to Abortion: Prior to Viability
|
- State may not prohibit
- May regulate so long as not an undue burden |
|
Right to Abortion: After Viability
|
State may prohibit UNLESS necessary to protect the woman's life/health
|
|
Spousal consent and notification laws for abortion
|
Unconstitutional
|
|
Privacy rights not afforded strict scrutiny
|
- Right to engage in homosexual activity
- Right to refuse medical treatment |
|
Equal Protection analysis (3 questions)
|
1. What is the classification
2. What level of scrutiny should be applied 3. Does this law meet the level of scrutiny |
|
Classifications based on Race and National Origin
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
Classifications benefiting minorities
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
Classifications based on Gender
|
Intermediate scrutiny
|
|
How is the existence of a classification proven
|
- Exists on the face of the law
- Law is facially neutral, but there is both a discriminatory Impact and Intent |
|
Classifications based on Alienage
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
Standard of review for alienage classifications that concern self-government and the democratic process
|
Rational Basis test
|
|
Government may discriminate against non-citizens for
|
- Voting
- Juries - Probation officer - Teacher - Police officer |
|
Classifications based on undocumented alien children
|
Intermediate scrutiny
|
|
Classifications against non-marital children
|
Intermediate scrutiny
|
|
Rational basis used for
|
- Age
- Disability - Wealth - Economic Regs - Sexual orientation discrimination |
|
Standard of review for fundamental rights
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
Fundamental rights protected under Equal Protection
|
- Right to travel
- Right to vote |
|
Two types of content-based restrictions on speech
|
1. Subject matter restriction
2. Viewpoint restriction |
|
Standard of review for content based restrictions
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
Standard of review for content neutral laws burdening speech generally
|
Intermediate scrutiny
|
|
Unprotected/less protected speech
|
- Incitement of illegal activity
- Obsencity and sexually-oriented speech |
|
Incitment of illegal activity test (2)
|
1. Substantial likelihood of imminent illegal activity
AND 2. The speech is directed to causing imminent illegal activity |
|
Commercial speech for illegal activity or false and deceptive ads
|
Not protected by the First amendment
|
|
Government regulation of commercial speech (2)
|
- Must be narrowly tailored
- Need NOT be the least restrictive alternative |
|
Regarding privacy, no liability for (2)
|
- Truthful reporting of lawfully obtained material
- Matters of public importance |
|
Speech for Government employees on the job or in the performance of duties
|
Not protected
|
|
Regulations on Public forums
|
- Limited to time, place, manner restrictions
- That serve an important government purpose AND - Leaves open adequate alternatives for communication - Need not be the least restrictive alternative |
|
Regulations on limited Public Forums
|
Same as for public forums
|
|
Regulations for non-Public forums
|
Government can regulate so long as the regulation is reasonable and viewpoint neutral
|
|
Standard of review for laws that prohibit or punish freedom of association
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
To punish membership in a group must prove (3)
|
1. Actively affiliated with the group
2. Knowing of its illegal activities AND 3. Has the specific intent of furthering those illegal activities |
|
Standard of review for laws that require disclosure of group membership
|
Strict scrutiny
|
|
Laws that prohibit a group from discriminating are constitutional UNLESS (2)
|
- They interfere with intimate associations
OR - Expressive activity |
|
The free exercise clause cannot be used to challenge
|
A neutral law of general applicability
|
|
The Establishment clause test (3)
|
1. Secular purpose
2. Effect neither advances nor inhibits religion 3. No excessive purpose |
|
Standard of review for discrimination against religious speech
|
Strict scrutiny
|