Midterm Cases

Question 1

Railway Express Agency v. New York

ads

Answer 1

“Issue/Facts
Did thelaw prohibiting ads on trucks violate thedue process?

Rule
Rational Basis

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Passes rational basis b/c overinclusive OK”

Question 2

NY City Transit Authority v. Beazer

addicted

Answer 2

“Issue/Facts
regulation prohibiting the hiring of former addicts recieving methodone treatment violate due process?

Rule
Rational Basis

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
passes rational basis even though policy is over and underinclusive”

Question 3

Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery

Milk

Answer 3

“Issue/Facts
Regulation banning plastic milk containers violate due process?

Rule
Rational Basis

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Passes rational basis b/c court must believe evidence unless FORCED to disbelieve legitimate purpose”

Question 4

US Dept of Agriculture v. Moreno

Hippie

Answer 4

“Issue/Facts
Regulation restricting food stamps to prohibit hippie communes violates due process?

Rule
Rational Basis - Animus

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Fails rational basis b/c bare desire to do harm appears in legislative history and ≠ legitimate gov’t interest”

Question 5

Cleburne, TX v. Cleburne Living Center

retarded

Answer 5

“Issue/Facts
Denying permit to home for retarded violate due process?

Rule
Rational Basis - Legitimate purpose

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Fails rational basis b/c court doesn’t believe legitimate purpose, or law doesn’t further legitimate purpose.”

Question 6

US v. Windor

gay

Answer 6

“Issue/Facts
Law defining family as hetero couples and preventing tax exemption violate due process?

Rule
Rational basis- Animus

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Purpose of law was to demean same sex couples ≠ legitimate purpose”

Question 7

Romer v. Evans

colorado

Answer 7

“Issue/Facts
Whether Amendment 2, prohibiting legislation to protect homosexuals, violates due process?

Rule
Rational basis- Animus

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Purpose of law was to demean same sex couples ≠ legitimate purpose”

Question 8

Korematsu v. US

Japs

Answer 8

“Issue/Facts
Was the governments interest in preventing espionage a compelling interst such that a law requiring the relocation of Japanese Americans is constitutional?

Rule
Strict Scrutiny - Racial Discrimination

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Court said yes it was but this case is kind of a black mark everyone says it was decided wrong becuase there were likely other ways to acomplish the gov goal”

Question 9

Loving v. Virginia

Loving

Answer 9

“Issue/Facts
Was a law preventing interacial marrage violate equal protection?

Rule
Strict Scrutiny - Racial Discrimination

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Restricting marriage based on race violates the meaning of equal protection”

Question 10

Palmore v. Sidoti

interracial Step-dad

Answer 10

“Issue/Facts
Was it constitutional for Florida to grant sole custody to a dad simply becuase the mother (divorced) was in an interactial relationship?

Rule
Strict Scrutiny - Racial Discrimination

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Yes, the kids life may be harder becuase her mom was in an interracial relationship but removing a child from it’s natural born mother based on a race classification is a violation of equal protection”

Question 11

GRATZ fail

20/100

Answer 11

“Issue/Facts
Did a colleges admissions policy that requried 100 points for admission, and gave 20 points for being a minority violate equal protection?

Rule
Strict Scrutiny - Racial Discrimination

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Admissions policies must be narrowly tailored. Race can be considered but must not be the sole or contributing factor in admissions.”

Question 12

Grutter v. Bollinger - pass

Plus

Answer 12

“Issue/Facts
Did U Mich law schools admission policy violate equal protection when race was one of many soft factors considered for admissions.

Rule
Strict Scrutiny - Racial Discrimination

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
The admissions policy was narroly tailoered and race was merely a factor of a factor of a factor in admissions that only resulted in a plus unlike GPA and LSAT scores.”

Question 13

City of Richmond v. Croson

contractors

Answer 13

“Issue/Facts
Did a law that set aside 30% of city’s construction budget for minority owned contractors violate equal protection?

Rule
Strict Scrutiny - Racial Discrimination

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
ultimate goal of Const. is to eliminate irrelevant factors, like race, from gov. decisions. You can use race to right past discrimination but it has to be limited to correcting discrimination in the JX the law/action passed/happened, You need evidence of the discriminiation, you need to try non racially motivated alternatives, and actions limited to the class discriminated against. "

Question 14

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

top 10% of students

Answer 14

“Issue/Facts
Did top 10% policy discriminate against whites and violate EP?

Rule
Strict Scrutiny - Racial Discrimination

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Deference to school to use diversity to achieve goals.
Studies showed admissions policy hasn’t achieved ““critical mass”” of minorities.
P didn’t support claim that admission policy has minimal affect.
No other workable plans to have diversity w/o using race.”

Question 15

Craig v. Boren

Beer drinking

Answer 15

“Issue/Facts
Did a law the set diff ages between males and females for low alcohol bear purchase violate EP?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Gender Discrimination

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
The gov.’s intest was valid but the law fails in other ways. Disparaity between males and females was large but the overall problem was actually small (very small percent of young men drink and drive). There were flaws in states statistical methods. not clear and convincing enough to allow sex based discrimination “

Question 16

US v. Virginia (VMI Case)

School boys

Answer 16

“Issue/Facts
All men school prohibiting women applicants violate EP?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Gender Discrimination

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Significant interest using adversarial method to teach (weak, but passable).
DOES NOT substantially further the interest b/c other mens programs (military) have successfully integrated women.
So long as some women want to apply, you can’t say that most don’t want to apply (strict view).”

Question 17

Frontiero v. Richardson - gender

dependant fathers

Answer 17

“Issue/Facts
Military dependant policy violate EP b/c woman denied more benefits b/c husband was denied as dependant?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Gender Discrimination

Constitutional?
No

Reasoning/Rule
Strict scrutiny for race also applies to gender.”

Question 18

Michael M. v. Superior ct of sonoma county

raped women

Answer 18

“Issue/Facts
Statutory rape law only punishes men (not women) violate EP?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Gender Discrimination

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Law ““equalises”” the deterrent.
Equal punishment would deter woman from reporting rape.”

Question 19

Rostker v. Goldberg

draft

Answer 19

“Issue/Facts
Policy excluding women from the draft violates EP?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Gender Discrimination

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Women are non combat.”

Question 20

Califano v. Webster

big checks

Answer 20

“Issue/Facts
Policy allowing women to exclude more time from benefits calculations violate EP?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Gender Discrimination

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Purpose is to remedy past discrimination.
Law was based on wage gap, not archaic generalizations.”

Question 21

Washington v. Davis

black cops

Answer 21

“Issue/Facts
Police admission test with disproportionate impact on blacks violate EP?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Race

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Statistical disparities and disproportionate impact aren’t sufficient to show purposeful discrimination. Must consider the totalitiy of the circumstances.”

Question 22

Personnel admin. Of Mass. V. Feeney

veterans

Answer 22

“Issue/Facts
Law favoring veterans over non-veterans violate EP when white woman with higher scores lost to veteran man?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Gender Discrimination

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
““Because of”” vs. ““in spite of”” test.
Not purposefully discriminatory b/c law not passed in order to discriminate against women. “

Question 23

Vill. of Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp

zoning violation

Answer 23

“Issue/Facts
zoning decision to deny low-income, racially segregated housing violate EP?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Race

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
For heightened scrutiny, it is not required to show that the discriminatory is the primary purpose.
Factors to show purposeful discrimination:
- Sequence of events
- Departures from normal procedural sequence
- Substantive departures
- Legislative or administrative history”

Question 24

McCleskey v. Kemp

death penalty

Answer 24

“Issue/Facts
Death penalty violate EP b/c study that shows disproportional impact when blacks kill whites?

Rule
Intermediate Scrutiny - Race

Constitutional?
Yes

Reasoning/Rule
Study showing disproportional impact not sufficient to show unconstitutional discrimination.
other policies against racial jury bias are in place to protect defendant’s rights. “

Question 25

Griswold v. Conn. *** | reproductive

Answer 25

"Issue/Facts Whether a Conn. law that prevented aiding people in obtaining or learning about contraception violate due process. Rule Substantive Due Process - Contraception Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule There are privacy right implied by the express guarantees that are necessary to make those guarantees more meaningful. The right of procreation arises under the right privacy is protected by the constitution. State purpose was not accepted by ct. and ct. felt the law was not sufficiently related to goal given."

Question 26

Michael v. Gerald | Parental

Answer 26

"Issue/Facts Whether a CA state law can prevent an unwed father from having a relationship with its father. Rule Substantive Due Process - Parental right Constitutional? Yes Reasoning/Rule This is an example about narrow and broad framing of issue. Ultimately the law was upheld becuase the court felt that an unwed an who had an adulterous affair with a women did not have a fundamental right to undue a family unit by usurping fatherhood from the woman's husband who had raised the child from birth."

Question 27

Buck vs. Bell | Reproductive - mental

Answer 27

"Issue/Facts Did a law the allowed forced steriliztion of mental patients violate Due Process. Rule Substantive Due Process - Sterilization Constitutional? Yes Reasoning/Rule Law was constitutional overturned by Skinner becuase procreation is a fundamental right."

Question 28

Skinner v. Oklahoma | reproductive - criminal

Answer 28

"Issue/Facts Did a Ok. law the allowed forced sterilization after 3""strikes"" vilate Due process? Rule Substantive Due Process - Sterilization Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule Procreative rights are a fundamental liberty. Law treated people commiting equally similar crimes (embezzelment and theft) differently. "

Question 29

Zablocki v. Redhail | marriage - Child support

Answer 29

"Issue/Facts Whether a law prohibiting fathers behind on child support from marrying violated due process. Rule Substantive Due Process - Marriage Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule There is a fundamental right to marry, and the states law was not narrowly drawn. There were other ways to collect unpaid child support."

Question 30

Moore v. Cleveland | Family

Answer 30

"Issue/Facts Whether a law restricting single family home occupancy to immediate family members violated a Due Process. Rule Substantive Due Process - Family living Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule Family living arangments are a fundamental right under the right to privacy. State argumed preventing overcrowing, traffic, parking congestion, and burdens on the schools. Sup. Ct. unconvinced law would achieve purpose."

Question 31

Stanley v. Illinois | Parental

Answer 31

"Issue/Facts Whether a law that awarded children of unmarried fathers to the state violated due process. Rule Substantive Due Process - Parental right Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule Law violates fundamental rights fo a parents intest in the custody of their kids. The presumtion that unwed fathers are unfit is false so the law is overbroad. "

Question 32

Meyer v. Nebraska | Education- Language

Answer 32

"Issue/Facts Whether the a Neb. law the prohibited teaching foreign laguages in thestate violated due process. Rule Substantive Due Process - education Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule Parents have a fundamental right to educate their children how they please. Teaching of german language is not damgerous."

Question 33

Pierce v. Sisters of Jesus | educations - public school

Answer 33

"Issue/Facts Whether a law requiring kids to go to public school violates due process. Rule Substantive Due Process - education Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule Parents have a fundamental right to educate their children how they please, this includes sending them to non-public schools."

Question 34

Troxel | Parents - Grandparents

Answer 34

"Issue/Facts Did a Washington State law that allowed grandparents to sue for visistation rights violate a parents due process? Rule Substantive Due Process - Grandparents Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule A parents interst in the care, custody, and control of their kids is a fundamental right and may not be abridged short of a compelling interest. Here the state law did not afford special weight to parents rights to decide for their kids, and did not even consider if the parent was fit or unfit"

Question 35

Roe v. Wade | Row boat

Answer 35

"Issue/Facts Whether texas law banning abortion is constitutional (woman's right to privacy)? Rule Abortion Rights - Fundamental Right Constitutional? Yes Reasoning/Rule 3 trimester test. 1st - normal medical laws OK. 2nd - Strict scrutiny applies. 3rd - Bans on abortion OK."

Question 36

Planned parenthood v. Casey | Prof. Casey

Answer 36

"Issue/Facts Whether disclosure requirement or spousal notification requirement are constitutional? Rule Abortion Rights - Undue Burden Constitutional? Yes Reasoning/Rule CREATES UNDUE BURDEN TEST for 1 and 2 trimester. 3rd trimester states can ban abortion."

Question 37

Harris v. Mcrae | State funding river

Answer 37

"Issue/Facts Policy denying state funding for medically necessary abortions violate DP? Rule Abortion Rights - Funding Constitutional? Yes ``` Reasoning/Rule Women's right to choose abortion were not unduly burdened. Poor women are not a suspect class needing to be protected." ```

Question 38

Maher v. Roe | Fed funding river

Answer 38

"Issue/Facts Does the conditional payment for abortion services violate the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution? Rule Abortion Rights - Undue burden Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule Roe v. Wade = right against undue burdens, not unconditional right to abortion. Refusing to fund abortions ≠ outright ban on abortions. OK for state to favor birth."

Question 39

Stenberg v. Carhart | Partial abortions - nebraska

Answer 39

"Issue/Facts Whether Nebraska law banning partial abortions is constitutional? Rule Abortion Rights - Undue Burden Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule law was vague and may have banned some ""normal"" abortions. Evidence showed partial abortions was SAFEST METHOD of abortion. Court can't prohibit the SAFEST medical procedure."

Question 40

Gonzalez v. Carhart | partial abortions - Fed

Answer 40

"Issue/Facts Whether Fed. law banning partial abortions is constitutional? Rule Abortion Rights - Undue Burden Constitutional? Yes Reasoning/Rule OK b/c congress was specific to not include ""normal"" abortions in definition of banned procedure (including intent, etc.). No health exception for mother b/c partial birth is merely SAFER, not SAFEST."

Question 41

Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt | Admitting privileges

Answer 41

"Issue/Facts Whether admitting-privileges requirement and the surgical-center requirement for abortions are constitutional. Rule Abortion Rights - Undue burden Constitutional? No Reasoning/Rule Undue burden test, in addition to the burden on the woman, includes whether the law is beneficial to the state. Here the court determined the law was not beneficial to the state = undue burden."

Question 42

Yick wo | Laundry

Answer 42

Issue Whether facially neutral law prohibiting laundromats in certain buildings (but only applied to Chinese) is constitutional. Rule Intermediate scrutiny - Race Constitutional? - No Reasoning/Rule Court found purposeful discrimination b/c law was unequally applied only to Chinese laundromats.