CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Question 1

What legislative power does Congress have over the District of Columbia?

Answer 1

Congress can exercise police power to regulate for the health, safety, and welfare of D.C. residents.

Question 2

What is the scope of Congress’s investigatory power under the Necessary and Proper Clause?

Answer 2

Congress may investigate any matter within its jurisdiction for legislative purposes, even compelling information from private entities.

Question 3

Under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, what types of cases can federal courts hear?

Answer 3

Federal courts may only hear cases involving federal questions and those based upon diversity of citizenship.

Question 4

What power does the Commerce Clause grant Congress, and how can it involve state regulation of interstate commerce?

Answer 4

• The Commerce Clause grants Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce.
• Congress may delegate, share, or prohibit state regulation.
• If Congress authorizes state regulation, states may enact laws that discriminate against or impose an undue burden on interstate commerce.

Question 5

What standard applies to a law that purposefully interferes with conduct dictated by religion?

Answer 5

The law will be subject to strict scrutiny, requiring the state to prove that it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.

Question 6

Under what conditions can a plaintiff assert the violation of constitutional rights of third parties?

Answer 6

1. The third parties will experience difficulty in asserting or are unlikely to assert their own rights.
2. A special relationship exists between the plaintiff and the third parties.

Question 7

What must the government demonstrate to satisfy the Public Use Clause in exercising eminent domain power?

Answer 7

The government must show that the exercise of eminent domain is rationally related to a conceivable public purpose.

Question 8

What standard is applied to laws making classifications based on illegal alienage?

Answer 8

• Laws making classifications based on illegal alienage are subject to rational basis analysis.
• The plaintiff must show that the measure serves no legitimate government interest or is not rationally related to any legitimate interest.

Question 9

What defines a political question, and how does it affect the court’s ability to hear a case?

Answer 9

• A political question is a matter assigned to another branch by the Constitution or incapable of a judicial answer.
• The court will not hear cases where the required decision is** political rather than legal** in character.

Question 10

What does the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protect, and who is excluded from its protections?

Answer 10

• The rights citizens have by being citizens of the United States, such as the right to petition Congress for redress of grievances.
  Equal Protection
  Substantive Due Process
  Procedural Due Process (Notice & A Hearing)
• Corporations and noncitizens are not protected under this clause.

Question 11

What does the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV?

Answer 11

Prevents states from discriminating against citizens of other states in four (4) areas:
1. Access to employment
2. Access to courts
3. Access to medical care
4. The ability to purchase property in the state

Corporations and aliens are NOT citizens

Question 12

What standard of scrutiny applies to classifications based on race, alienage, and national origin, and what is the exception for noncitizens?

Answer 12

Strict scrutiny applies, and state laws are presumptively invalid unless necessary to achieve a compelling state interest.

States may discriminate against noncitizens regarding participation in government functions.

Question 13

What authority does Congress have under the War Powers Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause regarding the national defense?

Answer 13

Congress has broad authority to initiate measures for national defense in peacetime and wartime, including wage, price, and rent control of the civilian economy during wartime.

Question 14

Under Article III, what cases or controversies can federal courts hear?

Answer 14

Federal courts may hear cases or controversies arising under the Constitution.

Question 15

Are matters involving foreign affairs subject to judicial review?

Answer 15

No, matters involving foreign affairs are generally non-justiciable and immune from judicial review, such as cases related to foreign policy or international affairs.

Question 16

When can an organization assert the claims of its members?

Answer 16

1. Members have standing to sue in their own right;
2. The interest asserted is germane to the organization’s purpose; and
3. The claim or relief does not require individual members to participate in the lawsuit.

Question 17

How can Congress remove the President, Vice President, or civil officers?

Answer 17

• Through impeachment and conviction.
• The House has the power to impeach, and the Senate tries impeachments.
• A 2/3 Senate vote is required for conviction.

Question 18

What does the Speech and Debate Clause protect, and what are its limits?

Answer 18

It protects U.S. Congress members from being questioned elsewhere for “any speech or debate in either house.”

It protects legislators and aides from criminal or civil proceedings for legislative acts, but does not cover defamatory statements in press releases, newsletters, or communications outside Congress.

Question 19

What privilege does the President have regarding military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets?

Answer 19

The President has an absolute privilege to refuse to disclose such information.

Question 20

Under its spending power, how can Congress condition federal funding?

Answer 20

Congress can condition funding on conformity to federal regulations, provided the conditions are reasonably related to the goals of the spending program.

Question 21

When can state regulations affecting interstate commerce be limited?

Answer 21

When:
1. Federal regulation preempts the state regulation;
2. The state regulation discriminates against interstate commerce; or
3. The state regulation imposes an undue burden on interstate commerce. States may regulate if Congress expressly consents.

Question 22

What three criteria limit state regulation of interstate commerce under the Dormant Commerce Clause?

Answer 22

The regulation must:
(1) Not be preempted;
(2) Not discriminate; and
(3) Not impose undue burdens unless justified.

Question 23

What is required for the President’s State of the Union obligation?

Answer 23

To provide Congress with periodic information and recommend measures deemed necessary and expedient (U.S. Const. art. II, Sect. 3).

Question 24

Can Congress expand the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction?

Answer 24

No, under Article III, Congress cannot enlarge or restrict the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.

Question 25

What gives the federal government authority over immigration and naturalization, and why does it preempt state power?

Answer 25

Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress exclusive authority over immigration, naturalization, and citizenship. State legislation regulating areas like the employment status of immigrants is preempted by federal law because these matters fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government.

Question 26

What power does Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution grant Congress regarding currency, and why can't states create substitutes?

Answer 26

Article I, Section 8 grants Congress the exclusive power to coin money. States or local governments cannot create substitute or competitive currencies because it violates the federal government's exclusive authority. Using vouchers as a substitute for U.S. currency, as in this case, is unconstitutional.

Question 27

How are education policies and funding evaluated under the Constitution, and what standard of review applies?

Answer 27

Education is not a fundamental right under the Constitution. Therefore, state education policies are reviewed under the rational basis test, where: The plaintiff must prove the policy is not rationally related to a legitimate state interest. Policies, such as allocating funds based on bona fide residency, are typically upheld if they are rationally related to balanced funding distribution. A student who is not a bona fide resident of a district cannot demand admission based on such policies.

Question 28

📌 How is legitimacy classified under equal protection, and what standard of review applies?

Answer 28

✅ Legitimacy is a quasi-suspect classification (Mathews v. Lucas, 1976). ✅ Intermediate (Middle-Tier) Scrutiny Applies: The government bears the burden to show the law is substantially related to an important interest. Requires an exceedingly persuasive justification. ✅ Case Example – Lalli v. Lalli (1978): The Supreme Court upheld a New York intestacy law requiring paternity to be proven during the father’s lifetime. Justification: Promotes a just and orderly distribution of property at death.

Question 29

📌 Has the company violated the First Amendment by arresting protestors who were protesting on privately owned streets connected to public highways?

Answer 29

✔️ Yes, because it has assumed a public function. Private actors like companies generally do not violate the Constitution, but when a company operates a "company town" (a private area resembling a public space), the First Amendment applies. In this case, the company owns streets that are open to the public and connected to public highways, essentially functioning as public streets. Under Marsh v. Alabama, when a company operates its premises like a public space, First Amendment rights are protected. The company violated the protestors' rights by arresting them simply for expressing their views on a public-like street.

Question 30

Is the statute constitutional, and can the father be punished under it?

Answer 30

The statute is constitutional on its face because it prohibits speech that threatens the life or safety of public officials. However, under Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), speech can only be prohibited if it is directed toward and likely to incite imminent lawless action. Since there is no indication that the father’s "threat" would be carried out by him or his 200 "amused" onlookers, he cannot be constitutionally punished under the statute.

Question 31

A joint resolution of Congress authorized the President to create mechanisms for the detention of "enemy combatants." The detention system developed by the executive branch provided for detention without notice or hearing throughout periods of ongoing hostilities, and a due process hearing only on the cessation of "active combat operations." A plaintiff was a United States citizen detained under this system, and, while combat operations were still underway, he filed suit in federal court through a next friend. Which of the following is the best argument against the constitutionality of the detention system?

Answer 31

**Back (Answer):** The failure to afford notice and a hearing violates the Fifth Amendment by depriving the plaintiff of liberty without due process of law. The detention system, as described, deprives the plaintiff of liberty without the opportunity to challenge the government's determination of "enemy combatant" status. The Fifth Amendment guarantees due process of law, which includes notice of the reasons for detention and an opportunity to contest the detention before a neutral decisionmaker. Because this system does not provide these protections, it violates the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.

Question 32

What is the strongest argument for a noncitizen who challenges a state law forbidding them from owning more than 50% of the stock in a publicly traded company?

Answer 32

The strongest argument is that the statute violates the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause. Government actions that discriminate against noncitizens are subject to strict scrutiny, meaning the state must demonstrate a compelling interest and that the law is the least restrictive means to achieve that interest. Here, the law discriminates against noncitizens without a clear compelling government interest to justify it, so the plaintiff would likely prevail under an equal protection challenge.

Question 33

What is the most likely result of the non-resident fisherman challenging the state law requiring a state fishing license?

Answer 33

The fisherman will prevail, because the federal license allows him to fish. Under the Supremacy Clause, state laws that conflict with valid federal laws are preempted and struck down. The federal law granting the fisherman a license to fish in all bodies of water, including navigable waters, is valid as an exercise of Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce. Since the state regulation conflicts with the federal law, it would be struck down.

Question 34

Is a state regulation requiring federal law enforcement officials to file notice before acting in criminal cases constitutional?

Answer 34

No, the regulation is unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause. The Supremacy Clause prevents states from regulating federal agents if it interferes with federal functions. Requiring federal law enforcement officials to file time-consuming paperwork before acting delays investigations and impermissibly regulates the federal government, violating the Constitution.

Question 35

Congress enacted a statute providing that persons may challenge a state energy law in either federal or state court on the grounds that it is in conflict with the Constitution. According to this federal statute, any decision by a lower state court upholding a state energy law against a challenge based on the Constitution may be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. Are the provisions of this statute authorizing direct U.S. Supreme Court review of specified decisions rendered by lower state courts constitutional?

Answer 35

The correct answer is:Yes, because Congress may establish the manner by which the appellate jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court is exercised. Discussion of correct answer:Under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court is given appellate jurisdiction "both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make." The case of Ex parte McCardle [74 U.S. 506 (1868)] upheld Congress's power to regulate broadly the scope of appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, subject to certain theoretical limitations: Congress may not deny the Supreme Court its essential constitutional role by taking from it all avenues of review, although certain classes of cases may be restricted, as long as some lower federal court has jurisdiction and due process protection is afforded. Further, under Article III, Congress has plenary power to establish and terminate lower federal courts and to confer and remove their scope of jurisdiction. This answer choice therefore correctly states the applicable rule of law by which Congress may establish Supreme Court appellate review of specified lower state court decisions

Question 36

A state has enacted a party affiliation statute prohibiting a person from being an independent candidate in a general election if he either: (1) registered with a political party during the year prior to the immediately preceding primary; or (2) voted in that primary. The state adopted the so-called "disaffiliation" statute in order to have intraparty feuds resolved in primary elections, rather than in the general election. Moreover, the elections director strongly supported the law and argued that it was necessary to avoid voter confusion and ensure that the general election winner received a majority. A candidate who was a registered Democrat the year before, now wishes to run as an Independent candidate in the upcoming general election. However, the elections director ruled that his candidacy violates the state's "disaffiliation" statute and has barred the candidate from appearing on the ballot. If the candidate files suit in federal district court challenging the constitutionality of the state election statute, which of the following best states the burden of persuasion?

Answer 36

The correct answer is:The state must demonstrate that the law is necessary to further a compelling state interest. Discussion of correct answer:The right to be a candidate is related to the fundamental right to vote. In general, the state's interest in limiting ballot access is twofold, as follows: (1) to reduce voter confusion; and (2) to maximize the probability that the winning candidate will have received a majority of the popular vote. In Storer v. Brown [415 U.S. 724 (1974)], a California provision that prohibited independent candidates from running in the general election if the candidates either had voted in the immediately preceding party primary or had registered their party affiliation with a qualified party within one year of the primary was upheld. The court determined that the "disaffiliation" statute furthered the state's compelling interest in the stability of the political system, and its interest in having "intraparty feuds" resolved in primaries, rather than in the general election. Based on the court's application of the strict scrutiny standard of review, this is the correct answer. The court noted further in Storer that the state must adopt reasonable alternative means for independent candidates and minor political parties to get a ballot position, and the alternative means must not place too heavy a burden on the right to vote and the right to associate.

Question 37

A statute of the state of X provides that "it is a misdemeanor for any person or organization to engage in the sale, trade, or other exchange of any non-food goods or other property without a class five commercial license, unless such person or organization is otherwise exempted from the operation of this section by law." Another statute provides that a person engaged in the sale of goods in connection with the funding or other activities of a religious, charitable, or educational organization need not possess any license as to those sales. A saleswoman has been charged with selling goods without a license in violation of law in connection with numerous transactions wherein she went door-to-door in residential neighborhoods selling cosmetics. The saleswoman has admitted that she possessed no license issued by state X, but claims that she is a disciple of a television evangelist who preaches that personal wealth is a sign of the blessedness of God. The saleswoman asserts that it is her religious duty to accumulate as much money as possible before she dies in order to assure that her soul will be permitted into Heaven, so her sales of cosmetics were for religious purposes and thus exempt from the sales-licensing law. The saleswoman waived trial by jury, and all of the above facts were established by competent evidence. Should the judge convict her?

Answer 37

No, because it would violate her rights under the Free Exercise Clause for the court to assess the truth or validity of her religious beliefs. Discussion of correct answer:The freedom to believe any form of religion, or to believe in no religion, is absolute. The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment (applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause) prohibits the government from imposing any burden on or granting any benefit to people because of their religious beliefs. This choice is the best alternative because denying the saleswoman the license exemption granted by statute would require the court to determine whether her particular religious beliefs were true or false. Courts may inquire into the sincerity with which a person holds an asserted belief and into the importance of that belief to the religious or spiritual system of the person, but none of the picks present that alternative

Question 38

In a small town, almost all of the citizens have the same cultural practice of children remaining in their parent's home until they marry and begin their own families. The community was very traditional, and a town ordinance was put into place that prohibited unrelated persons from living together in the same household. One spring, two unrelated students graduated from high school and decided to move into a house together. The couple rented the house from an elderly man who had moved back in with his children. When the man learned that the house was being occupied by an unmarried couple, he evicted them pursuant to the town ordinance. The couple filed suit against the man for wrongful eviction and argued that the ordinance violated their fundamental right to live together. Will the couple's argument succeed?

Answer 38

No, because the students are not related. A fundamental right exists for related persons to live together. However, this fundamental right does not apply to unrelated persons. The ordinance in this example prohibits unrelated persons from living together. Because the couple is unrelated, they do not have a fundamental right to live together. Therefore, they will not be able to successfully claim that their fundamental right to live together has been violated.