Core Comps Constitutional Law Questions
A city had a severe traffic problem on its streets. As a result, it enacted an ordinance prohibiting all sales to the public of food or other items by persons selling directly from trucks, cars, or other vehicles located on city streets. The ordinance included an inseverable grandfather provision exempting from its prohibition vendors who, for 20 years or more, have continuously sold food or other items from such vehicles located on the city's streets. An ice cream truck is the only food vendor that qualifies for this exemption. A frozen yogurt vendor is similar to the ice cream truck, but the yogurt vendor has only been selling to the public directly from trucks located on the city's streets for the past ten years. The yogurt vendor has filed suit in an appropriate federal district court to enjoin enforcement of this ordinance on the ground that it denies the yogurt vendor equal protection of the laws. How is the court likely to rule? A. The ordinance is constitutional, because it is narrowly tailored to implement the city's compelling interest in reducing traffic congestion and, therefore, satisfies strict scrutiny B. The ordinance is unconstitutional, because its validity is governed by the rational basis test, and courts consistently defer to the objective embodied in such legislation if they are even plausibly justifiable C. The ordinance is unconstituitonal, because economic benefits or burdens imposed by legislatures through grandfather provisions have consistently been declared invalid by courts as per se equal protection violations D. The ordinance is unconstitutional, because the nexus between the legitimate purpose of the ordinace and the conduct it prohibits is so tenuous and the ordinance is so underinclusive that it fails to satisfy the substantial relationship test
B
A group of students at a state university's law school wished to debate the future of affirmative action in that state and at that law school. For this debate, the students requested the use of a meeting room in the law school that is available on a first-come, first-served basis for extracurricular student use. Speakers presenting all sides of the issue were scheduled to participate. The law school administration denied the use of its meeting room for this purpose solely because it believed that "such a debate, even if balanced, would have a negative effect on the morale of the law school community and might cause friction among the students that would disrupt the institution's educational mission." Is the law school's denial of the use of its meeting room for this purpose likely constitutional? A. No, because the law school cannot demonstrate that its action was necessary to serve a compelling state interest B. No, because the law school cannot demonstrate that its action was rationally related to a legitimate state interest C. Yes, because the law school's only concern was the adverse effect of such a discussion of affirmative action on the immediate audiecne and the mission of the institution D. Yes, because the law students do not have a right to use a state-owned law school facility for a meeting that is not organized and sponsored by the law school itself
A
A state law provides that a person who has been divorced may not marry again unless he or she is current on all child-support payments. A woman who was refused a marriage license pursuant to this law sued the appropriate state officials. What standard should the court apply in reviewing the constitutionality of this law? A. The state must show that the law is necessary to serve a compelling government interest B. The state must show that the law is substantially related to an important government interest C. The woman must show that the law serves no important public purpose D. The woman must show that the legislature did not have a rational basis for enacting the law
A
A state law provides that only U.S. citizens may serve as jurors in the state courts of that state. A woman who is a lawful resident alien and who has resided in the state for many years was summoned for jury duty in a state court. The woman's name was selected from a list of potential jurors that was compiled from a comprehensive list of local residents. She was disqualified from service solely because she is not a U.S. citizen. The woman has filed an action for a declaratory judgment that the state law is unconstitutional. Who should prevail in this action? A. The state, because a state may limit to U.S. citizens functions that are an integral part of the process of self-government B. The state, because jury service is a privilege, not a right, and therefore it is not a liberty interest protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment C. The woman, because the Constitute gives Congress plenary power to make classifications with respect to aliens D. The woman, because the state has no articulated a legitimate reason for prohibiting resident aliens from serving as jurors in the state's courts
A
Congress enacted a statute that made it illegal for "any employee, without the consent of his or her employer, to post on the Internet any information concerning the employer." The purpose of the statute was to prevent employees from revealing their employers' trade secrets. Is the statute constitutional? A. No, because it is not narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest B. No, because it targets a particular medium of communication for special regulation C. Yes, because it leaves open ample alternative channels of communication D. Yes, because it prevents employees from engaging in unethical conduct
A
The owner of a brewery gave a presentation in a public park about why the state's brewery laws should be repealed. During the presentation, the owner repeatedly referred to the brewery laws as "those *******ed state brewery laws." A state statute, enacted in 1880, makes criminal "the utterance in any public place of any blasphemy or sacrilege." Assume that there have been only a few recorded prosecutions under the 1880 statute. The owner is charged with violating its proscriptions. Which of the following constitutional defenses to this prosecution would be the LEAST likely to succeed? A. Application of the statute to the owner denies him equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment B. Application of this statute to the owner denies him freedom of speech in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment C. This statute is an establishment of religion, and, therefore violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment D. This statute is vague, and, therefore, violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
A
Under a state law, a drug company that makes a false factual claim about a prescription drug is strictly liable in tort to any user of the drug. In an advertisement promoting sales of a particular drug, a drug company claimed that the drug was safe for children. Suit was filed against the company on behalf of a child who allegedly was harmed as a result of taking the drug. At the time the child took the drug, the available medical studies supported the company's claim that the drug was safe for children, but later research proved that the drug actually was harmful to children. The company has moved to dismiss the suit on First Amendment grounds. Should the court grant the motion? A. No, because false or misleading commercial speech is not constitutionally protected B. No, because the drug business is subject to extensive health and safety regulation C. Yes, because liability cannot be imposed for false statements without a showing of actual malice D. Yes, because the company's claims about the drug were a matter of public concern
A
A man intensely disliked his neighbors. One night, intending to frighten them, he spray-painted their house with racial epithets and threats to kill them. The man was arrested and prosecuted under a state law providing that "any person who threatens violence against another person with the intent to cause that person to fear for his or her life or safety may be imprisoned for up to five years." In defense, the man claimed that he did not intend to kill his neighbors, but only to scare them so that they would move away. Can the man constitutionally be convicted under this law? A. No, because he was only communicating his views and had not commmenced any overt action against the neighbors B. Yes, because he was engaged in trespass when he painted the words on his neighbors' house C. Yes, because his communication was a threat by which he intended to intimidate his neighbors D. Yes, because his communication was racilaly motivated and thus violated the protections of the Thirteenth Amendment
C
A public high school has had a very high rate of pregnancy among its students. In order to assist students who keep their babies to complete high school, the school has established an infant day-care center for children of its students, and also offers classes in child care. Because the child-care classes are always overcrowded, the school limits admission to those classes solely to students who are the mothers of babies in the infant day-care center. A male student at the high school has legal custody of his infant son. The school provides care for his son in its infant day-care center, but will not allow the student to enroll in the child-care classes. He brings suit against the school challenging, on constitutional grounds, his exclusion from the child-care classes. Which of the following best states the burden of persuasion in this case? A. The male student must demonstrate that the admission is not as narrowly drawn as possible to achieve a substantial governmental interest B. The male student must demonstrate that the admission requirement is not rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest C. The school must demonstrate that the admission policy is substantially related to an important governmental interest D. The school must demonstrate that the admission policy is the least restrictive means by which to achieve a compelling governmental interest
C
A state statute provides that only citizens of the United States may be employed by that state. In an action brought in a federal court, a resident noncitizen who was prevented from obtaining state employment as a garbage collector solely because of his noncitizen status challenged the statute's constitutionality as applied to his circumstances. Which of the following statements concerning the burden of persuasion applicable to this suit is correct? A. The resident noncitizen must demonstrate that the citizenship requirement is not necessary to advance a compelling state interest B. The resident noncitizen must demonstrate that there is no rational relationship between the citizenship requirement and any legitimate state interest C. The state must demonstrate that the citizenship requirement is necessary to advance a compelling state interest D. The state must demonstrate that there is a rational relationship betwen the citizenship requirement and a legitimate state interest
C
An independent municipal water-supply district was incorporated under the applicable laws of a state. The district was created solely to supply water to an entirely new community in a recently developed area of the state. That new community is racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse, and the community has never engaged in any discrimination against members of minority groups. The five-member elected governing board of the newly created water-supply district contains two persons who are members of racial minority groups. At its first meeting, the governing board adopted a rule unqualifiedly setting aside 25% of all positions on the staff of the water-supply district and 25% of all contracts to be awarded by the district to members of racial minority groups. The purpose of the rule was "to help redress the historical discrimination against these groups in this country and to help them achieve economic parity with other groups in our society." Assume that no federal statute applies. In a suit by appropriate parties challenging the constitutionality of these set-asides, what is the most appropriate ruling based on applicable United States Supreme Court precedent? A. The set-arises are constitutional, because the function and activities of the water-supply district are of a propeirtary nature rather than a governmental nature and, therefore, are not subject to the usual requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment B. The set-asides are constitutional, because they would assure members of racial minority groups the equal protection of the laws C. The set-asides are unconstitutional, because they would deny other potential employees or potential contractors the equal protection of the laws D. The set-asides are unconstitutional, because they would impermissibly impair the right to contract of other potential employees or potential contractors
C
Congress enacts a criminal statute prohibiting "any person from interfering in any way with any right conferred on another person by the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." In which of the following scenarios would this statute apply? A. A private citizen coerces a bus driver operating a free school bus service under the sponsorship of a local church to refuse to allow black pupils on the bus, solely because of their race B. A private citizen coerces a federal official in charge of distributing certain federal benefits directly to students from distributing them to black pupils, solely because of their face C. A private citizen coerces a public-school teacher to exclude black pupils from her class, solely because of their race D. A private citizen coerces black pupils, solely because of their race, to refrain from attending a privately owned and operated school licensed by the state
C
In one state, certain advanced diagnostic medical technologies were located only in hospitals, where they provided a major source of revenue. In many other states, such technologies were also available at "diagnostic centers" that were not affiliated with hospitals. A group of physicians announced its plan to immediately open in the state a diagnostic center that would not be affiliated with a hospital. The state hospital association argued to the state legislature that only hospitals could reliably handle advanced diagnostic medical technologies. The legislature then enacted a law prohibiting the operation in the state of diagnostic centers that were not affiliated with hospitals. The group of physicians filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the state law. What action should the court take? A. Dismiss the suit without reaching the merits, because the suit is not ripe B. Invalidate the law, because it imposes an undue burden on access to medical services in the state C. Uphold the law, because the legislature could rationally believe that diagnostic center not affiliated with hospitals would be less reliable than hospitals D. Uphold the law, because the provision of medical services is traditionally a matter of legitimate local concern that states have unreviewable authority to regulate
C
Residents of a city complained that brightly colored signs detracted from the character of the city's historic district and distracted motorists trying to navigate its narrow streets. In response, the city council enacted an ordinance requiring any "sign or visual display" visible on the streets of the historic district to be black and white and to be no more than four feet long or wide. A political party wanted to hang a six-foot-long red, white, and blue political banner in front of a building in the historic district. The party filed suit to challenge the constitutionality of the sign ordinance as applied to the display of its banner. Which of the following would be the most useful argument for the political party? A. The ordinance effectively favors some categories of speech over others B. The ordinance imposes a prior restraint on political expression C. The ordinance is not narrowly tailored to further an important government interest, nor does it leave open alternative channels of communication D. The ordinance is not the least restrictive means of promoting a compelling government interest
C
A boy was the illegitimate, unacknowledged child of a man. The man died intestate, leaving neither a spouse nor any children other than the boy. The state's law of intestate succession provides that an unacknowledged, illegitimate child may not inherit his father's property. The spouse, all other blood relations, and the state are preferred as heirs over the unacknowledged, illegitimate child. The boy filed suit in an appropriate court alleging that the state statute barring an illegitimate child from sharing in a parent's estate is invalid, and that he should be declared lawful heir to his father's estate. In challenging the validity of the state statute, what is the boy's strongest argument? A. He has been deprived of property, without due process because his fundamental right to inherit has been compromised without a compelling state need B. it is a denial of procedural due process because it does not give the boy an opportunity to prove paternity C. It violates the privileges or immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment D. There is no rational basis for preferring as heirs collateral relatives and even the state over the boy, and, therefore, the law violates the equal protection clause.
D
A city owned and operated a municipal bus system. The city sold space on its buses for the posting of placards. Under the relevant city ordinance, the administrator of the bus system had sole discretion to decide which placards could be posted on the buses, and the administrator's decision was final. Although most of the placards that appeared on city buses were commercial advertisements, the administrator had often sold space on the buses for placards promoting various political, charitable, and religious causes. After a circus bought space on the buses for placards advertising its upcoming performances, an animal rights organization asked to buy space for a placard with photographs showing the mistreatment of animals in circus shows. The administrator denied the organization's request, stating that the proposed placard would be offensive to the circus, which had paid a substantial sum to place its placards on the buses, and that a circus employee had told her that none of the photographs on the organization's placard depicted animals belonging to this particular circus. The organization sued the administrator in an appropriate court for a declaration that her denial of the organization's request for placard space for the reasons she gave violated the First Amendment as made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. Is the organization likely to prevail? A. No, because a public official may not allow the use of public facilities for the propagation of a message that he or she believes may create a false or misleading impression B. No, because the administrator's denial of space to the organization was a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction of speech C. Yes, because a public official may not refuse to allow the use of any public facility to publish a message dealing with an issue of public concern D. Yes, because a public official may not refuse to permit the dissemination of a message in a public forum solely on the basis of its content unless the denial is necessary to serve a compelling government interest
D
A city passed an ordinance requiring individuals to obtain a license in order to care for children under the age of 12 for pay. City officials who promoted the ordinance said that the licensing process would ensure that child-care workers were adequately regulated for the health and safety of the city's children. To receive a license, the ordinance requires an individual to complete 10 hours of instruction in child care, undergo a background check, and pay a $100 fee. The ordinance affects women disproportionately to men, because female child-care workers far outnumber male child-care workers in the city. Is the ordinance constitutional? A. No, because it has a disparate impact on women without a showing that the ordinance is necessary to serve a compelling government interest B. No, because it infringes on the freedom of contract without a compelling government interest C. Yes, because any burden it imposes is clearly outweighed by an important government objective D. Yes, because it is rationally related to a legitimate government objective
D
A city zoning ordinance requires that anyone who proposes to operate a group home obtain a special-use permit from the city zoning board. The zoning ordinance defines a group home as a residence in which four or more unrelated adults reside. An individual applied for a special-use permit to operate a group home for convicts during their transition from serving prison sentences to their release on parole. Although the proposed group home met all of the requirements for the special-use permit, the zoning board denied the individual's application because of the nature of the proposed use. The individual sued the zoning board seeking declaratory and injunctive relief on constitutional grounds. Which of the following best states the appropriate burden of persuasion in this action? A. Because housing is a fundamentla right, the zoning board must demonstrate that denial of the permit is necessary to serve a compelling state interest B. Because the zoning board's action has the effect of discriminating against a quasi-suspect class in regard to a basic subsistence right, the zoning board must demonstrate that the denial of the permit is substantially related to an important government interest C. Because the zoning board's action invidiously discriminates against a suspect class, the zoning board must demonstrate that denial of the permit is necessary to serve a compelling government interest D. Because the zoning board's action is in the nature of an economic or social welfare regulation, the individual seeking the permit must demonstrate that the denial of the permit is not rationally related to a legitimate government interest
D
A newly-enacted state criminal statute provides, in its entirety, "No person shall utter to another person in a public place any annoying, disturbing, or unwelcome language." A man followed an elderly woman for three blocks down a public street, yelling in her ear offensive four-letter words. The woman repeatedly asked the man to leave her alone, but he refused. If the man is subsequently prosecuted under this statute, what is the likely result? A. The man will be convicted B. The man will not be convicted, because the average user of a public street would not think that his conduct was annoying C. The man will not be convicted, because the speech directed toward the woman cannot be punished under the First and Fourteenth Amendments Dl.The man will not be convicted, though his speech here may be punished by the state, the state may not do so under this statute
D
A number of psychotherapists routinely send mailings to victims of car accidents informing the victims of the possibility of developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as the result of the accidents, and offering psychotherapy services. Although PTSD is a possible result of a car accident, it is not common. Many accident victims in a particular state who received the mailings complained that the mailings were disturbing and an invasion of their privacy. These victims also reported that as a result of the mailings, their regard for psychotherapists and for psychotherapy as a form of treatment had diminished. In response, the state enacted a law prohibiting any licensed psychotherapist from sending mailings that raised the concern of PTSD to any car accident victim in the state until 30 days after the accident. The state justified the law as an effort to address the victims' complaints as well as to protect the reputation of psychotherapy as a form of treatment. Is this law constitutional? A. No, because the law singles out one type of message for prohibition while allowing others B. No, because the mailings provide information to consumers C. Yes, because mailings suggesting the possibility of developing PTSD as the result of an accident are misleading D. Yes, because the law protects the privacy of accident victims and the public regard for psychotherapy without being substantially more restrictive than necessary
D
A state has a state employee grievance system that requires any state employee who wishes to file a grievance against the state to submit that grievance for final resolution to a panel of three arbitrators chosen by the parties from a statewide board of 13 arbitrators. In any given case, the grievant and the state alternate in exercising the right of each party to eliminate five members of the board, leaving a panel of three members to decide their case. At the present time, the full board is composed of seven male arbitrators and six female arbitrators. A female state employee filed a sexual harassment grievance against her male supervisor and the state. The state's attorney exercised all of her five strikes to eliminate five of the female arbitrators. At the time she did so, the state's attorney stated that she struck the five female arbitrators solely because she believed women, as a group, would necessarily be biased in favor of another woman who was claiming sexual harassment. Counsel for the state employee eliminated four males and one female arbitrator, all solely on grounds of specific bias or conflicts of interest. As a result, the panel was all male. When the panel ruled against the state employee on the merits of her case, she filed an action in an appropriate state court, challenging the panel-selection process as a gender-based denial of equal protection of the laws. In this case, how should the court rule as to the constitutionality of the panel-selection process? A. Constitutional, because the gender classification used by the state's attorney in this case satisfies the requirements of the rational basis test B. Constitutional, because the gender classification used by the state's attorney in this case satisfies the requiprements of the strict scrutiny test C. Unconstitutional, because the gender classification used by the state's attorney in this case denies the grievant the right to a jury made up of her peers D. Unconstitutional, because the gender classification used by the state's attorney in this case does not satisfy the requirements of intermediate scrutiny
D
A state has enacted a new election code designed to increase voter responsibility in the exercise of the franchise and to enlarge citizen participation in the electoral process. None of its provisions conflict with federal statutes. Which of the following is the strongest reason for finding unconstitutional a requirement in the state election code that each voter must be literate in English? A. The requirement violates Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, which requires that representatives to Congress be chosen by the people of the several states B. The requirement violates Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution which gives Congress the power to make or alter state regulations providing for the Times and Manner of holding elections for senators and representatives C. The requirement violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment D. The requirement violates the equal protetion clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
D
A state legislature received complaints from traffic accident victims who, in the days immediately following their accidents, had received unwelcome and occasionally misleading telephone calls on behalf of medical care providers. The callers warned of the risks of not obtaining prompt medical evaluations to detect injuries resulting from accidents and offered free examinations to determine whether the victims had suffered any compensable injuries. In response to these complaints, the legislature enacted a law prohibiting medical care providers from soliciting any accident victim by telephone within 30 days of his or her accident. Which of the following arguments would be most helpful to the state in defending the constitutionality of the law? A. Because the commercial speech that is the subject of the law includes some speech that is misleading, the First Amendment does not limit the state's power to regulate that speech B. Because the law regulates only commercial speech, the state need only demonstrate that the restriction is rationally related to achieving the state's legitimate interests in protecting the privacy of accident victims and in regulating the medical profession C. The law is a reasonable time, place, and manner regulation D. The state has substantial interests in protecting the privacy of accident victims and in regulating the practice of medical care providers, and the law is narrowly tailored to achieve the state's objectives
D
A state statute provides that persons moving into a community to attend a college on a full-time basis may not vote in any elections for local or state officials that are held in that community. Instead, the statute provides that for voting purposes all such persons shall retain their residence in the community from which they came. In this state the age of majority is 18. Which of the following is the strongest argument to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of this state statute? A. A state does not have an interest that is sufficiently compelling to justify the exclusion from voting of an entire class of persons B. Most persons moving to a community to attend college full-time are likely to have attained the age of majority under the laws of this state C. On its face this statute impermissibly discriminates against interstate commerce D. There are less restrictive means by which the state could ensure that only actual residents of a community vote in its elections
D
In order to foster an environment conducive to learning, a school board enacted a dress code that prohibited all public high school students from wearing in school shorts cut above the knee. Because female students at the school considered it unfashionable to wear shorts cut at or below the knee, they no longer wore shorts to school. On the other hand, male students at the school regularly wore shorts cut at or below the knee because they considered such shorts to be fashionable. Female students sued to challenge the constitutionality of the dress code on the ground that it denied them the equal protection of the laws. Should the court uphold the dress code? A. No, because the dress code is not necessary to further a compelling state interest B. No, because the dress code is not substantially related to an important state interest C. Yes, because the dress code is narrowly tailored to further an important state interest D. Yes, because the dress code is rationally related to a legitimate state interest
D
