Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Constitutional Law - Coggle Diagram

- - - - BUT: Congress has power to limit the President. Challenges to the President's conduct as commander in chief are likely to be viewed as non justiciable political questions.
    - - Treaties are the supreme law of the land if they are self-executing. State laws that conflict with a self executing treaty are invalid.
        
        Conflict with federal law? the last in time prevails
        
        Constitution prevails over treaty
        
        Federal law trumps executive agreements and they do not need senate approval
- - - - Injury in fact: 1) a particularized injury (affects in individualized way); and 2) concrete injury- one that actually exists. Examples: physical, economic, environmental, loss of const or statutory rights.
        
        Additional Standing and Injury Rules:
        
        GR: People have no standing merely by virtue of being citizens or taxpayers to claim that gov is doing something wrong. Too generalized.
        
        Exception: A taxpayer can challenge their own tax liability.
        
        Exception: 10th Amendment. Fed gov violates 10 A, but needs redress injury
        
        Exception: Congressional spending. People have standing to challenge congressional spending measures on First Amendment Establishment Clause grounds)
        
        Organizational Standing: sue on behalf of members if 1)there is an injury in fact to the members 2) the members injury is related to the organization's purpose 3) individual member participation in law suit not required.
        
        Standing for Free Speech Overbreadth Claims: if the government restricted substantially more speech than necessary, even if that persons own speech would not be protected, then can bring claim on behalf of others whose speech would be protected. DOES NOT apply to commercial speech
        
        Federal statute can create interest/injury sufficient for standing,
        
        Standing to enforce a government statute if P within zone of interest.
        
        When? already occurred or will occur imminently
        
        Third party standing: Plaintiff have standing and third party do as well, but for some reason cannot sue, and plaintiff adequately represents their interests
      - Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and conduct complained of.
      - Redressability: a decision in the litigant's favor must be capable of eliminating their harm
  - - - Ripeness: harm must actually be threatened 1) the issues are fit for a judicial decision (the more legal issues case involves, the more fit it is); 2) the plaintiff would suffer substantial hardship in the absence of review. WATCH OUT FOR PROPOSED LEGISLATION-->not ripe
      - Mootness: GR a live controversy must exist at all stages of review. Exceptions:
        
        Class actions: unmoot if at least 1 class member claim is still viable
        
        Voluntary Cessation: D stops conduct but is free to resume
        
        situations capable of repetition yet evading review
- - - - Such regulations will be upheld unless they are irrational or burden a fundamental right or involve a suspect or quasi suspect classification.
      - State governments may not regulate federal activities.
  - - - Noncoercive spending conditions
      - 14A: Congress may restrict states from discriminating in violation of equal protection or depriving rights protected by due process
  - - - Conflict between State and Federal Law requirements: if a state law conflicts with federal law requirements, such that it would be impossible to follow both laws, the state law will be held to be impliedly preempted.
      - State prevents achievement of Federal Objective: this is true even if state law was enacted for a valid purpose.
      - Field Preemption: federal law impliedly occupies the entire field, even if the state or local law is nonconflicting. Question of congressional intent, deciphered through the regulatory scheme itself.
  - - - Commercial activities: pursuit of livlihood
      - fundamental rights
      - EXCEPTION: if state law burdens Commercial activity or fundamental right, it will be invalid unless the law is necessary to achieve an important government purpose and there are no less restrictive means,
- - - - No fundamental rights involved
        
        Rational Basis
      - Fundamental right involved Privacy, Interstate Travel, Voting, First Amendment
        
        Strict Scrutiny
        
        Privacy related rights: Marriage (interracial or same sex), Procreation, Use of Contraceptives, rights of parents, keeping extended family together
        
        Abortion: Pre viability: no undue burden. Post viability: may prohibit unless woman's health is threatened
    - - Requires: notice, opportunity to be heard, and a neutral decision maker
        
        Hearing (typically claimant given a pre-deprivation hearing): balancing test: weigh the importance of the interest to the individual; the value of specific procedural safeguards to that interest ; AGAINST the government interest in fiscal and administrative efficiency
        
        Neutral decision maker: cannot have actual bias or a serious risk of actual bias.
        
        Notice: reasonably calculated to inform person of deprivation
      - Liberty: losses significant freedom of action OR is denied a freedom provided by the Constitution or a statute. Injury to reputation itself is not a deprivation of liberty.
  - - - Strict Scruitny
    - - Strict Scrutiny
    - - Intermediate Scrutiny
    - - Rational Basis
    - - The law is discriminatory on its face
      - Discriminatory application
      - Facially neutral law with a disparate impact on a protected class of people (such as minorities
  - - - hus, unless the private individual (i) was performing exclusively public functions, or (ii) took actions with significant state involvement, the individual's action is not unconstitution
- - - - Commerce Clause: Congress has power to regulate all foreign and interstate commerce, as well as commerce with Indian Tribes. Congress can only regulate existing commercial activity; it does not give Congress power to compel activity
        
        Regulate the instrumentalities of interstate commerce and persons and things in interstate commerce
        
        Regulate the channels of interstate commerce (highways, waterways, telephone lines, the internet)
        
        Regulate activities that have substantial effect on interstate commerce
        
        Intrastate activity?
        
        Court will uphold if it can think of a rationale basis on which Congress could conclude that the activity in the aggregate substantially affects interstate commerce. (Wickard)
        
        10th Amendment precludes Congress from regulating noneconomic intrastate activity in areas traditionally regulated by state or local governments
        
        Power to Prohibit Private Discrimination: if activities have substantial effect on interstate commerce. Contrast with public discrimination, which congress directly regulates under 14th Amendment
        
        Congress not enacted a law? state regulates local aspects of interstate commerce?
        
        Dormant Commerce Clause: State or local government must not discriminate against or unduly burden interstate commerce.
        
        Discriminatory Regulations: state or local regulations that discriminate against interstate commerce to protect local economic interests are nearly always invalid. (protectionist)
        
        But a discriminatory state or local law may be valid if it is necessary to achieve an important, noneconomic state interest and there are no reasonable alternatives available.
        
        Nondiscriminatory regulations (a law that threats local and out of state interests alike): presumed valid. Balancing test: if the law burdens interstate commerce, it will be valid unless the burden outweighs the promotion of a legitimate local interests. The Court will also consider whether less restrictive alternatives are available.
        
        State control of corporations: A different standard may apply to statutes adopted by the state of incorporation regulating the internal governance of a corporation, law may be upheld.
        
        EXCEPTIONS:
        
        Favoring Government Performing Traditional Government Functions: (such as waste disposal). permissible because it is likely motivated by legitimate objectives rather than by economic protectionism
        
        State as "Market Participant": but if a state sells state owned resourced, it cannot control what happens to the resource after the sale.
        
        Congressional Approval
      - Taxing & Spending Powers: Congress has the power to tax and spend to provide for the general welfare. Virtually ANY public purpose not prohibited by the Constitution
        
        Spending Powers Conditions: Congress can impose conditions on the grant of money to state or local governments as long as they are: 1) clearly state; 2) relate to the purpose of the program; 3) are not unduly coercive; and 4) do not otherwise violate the Constitution
        
        Tax: must bear some reasonable relationship to revenue production or be within Congress's regulatory power. Limited by individual rights
        
        A State tax is valid under the Commerce Clause if: (i) the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce; (ii) there is a substantial nexus between the activity taxed and the taxing state; (iii) the tax is fairly apportioned; and (iv) the tax fairly relates to services or benefits provided by the state.
- - - - Incitement: 1) intended to produce imminent lawless action and 2) likely to produce such action
      - Fighting Words: speech can be censored if it constitutes fighting words which are personally abusive words which are likely to incite immediate physical retaliation in an average person.
        
        Court will strike down fitting words statutes that are designed to only punish certain viewpoints
      - True Threats: words intended to convey to someone a serious threat of bodily harm
      - Obscenity: speech that describes or depicts sexual conduct specified by statute that, taken as a whole, by the average person to: 1) appeal to the prurient interest in sex, using a contemporary community standard 2) patently offensive under contemporary community standards AND 3) lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value using a national, reasonable person/. Child pornography is NEVER allowed.
      - Defamation: if the defamatory statement is about a public official or figure or involves a matter of public concern, the plaintiff must prove all the elements of defamation plus falsity and some free of fault in order to recover
        
        Public Figure (those who assumed roles of prominence in society 2) achieved pervasive fame and notoriety 3) thrust themselves into the limelight of particular public controversies to influence their resolution) or Official
        
        Plaintiff must show actual malice: clear and convincing evidence that the alleged defamatory statement was made with-->knowledge that it was false or reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity.
        
        Public Concern: Generally, it is a tort to publish private information about a person, even if it is true, if a reasonable person would object to having the information made public. However, if the matter is one of legitimate public interest, its publication is privileged if it is made with without actual malice, especially if the information was obtained legitimately, such as a picture taken in public.
        
        Private
        
        Suiit involves a matter of public concern: the plaintiff can only recover actual damages if the plaintiff shows negligence. If wants to recover PUNITIVE damages-->show actual malice.
        
        Private concern: 1A not involved.
        
        IIED: proof of actual malice
        
        The First amendment does not provide the press with any special right to trespass, even if the trespass was done in order to investigate a story about a public figure or a matter of public concern.
        
        Under certain circumstances, a speaker will not be liable for defamatory statements because she is afforded an absolute privilege. Such a privilege is not affected by a showing of malice, abuse, or excessive provocation. Remarks made by either federal or state legislators in their official capacity during legislative proceedings are absolutely privileged. There is no requirement of a reasonable relationship to any matter at hand
      - Commercial Speech
        
        Not protected if it is false, misleading, about illegal products or services.
        
        All other regulations will be upheld if : serves a substantial government interest, directly advances that interest, and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest (form of intermediate scruitny)
        
        Complete bans on truthful adds are not allowed.
        
        Required disclosures: gov may require if the disclosures are not unduly burdensome and they are reasonably related to the state's interest in preventing deception
        
        There is a four-part analysis for commercial speech cases: 1) whether the commercial speech concerns lawful activity and is not misleading; 2) whether the asserted government interest is substantial; 3) whether the regulation directly advances the government interest; and 4) whether the regulation is no more restrictive than necessary. The regulation need not be the least restrictive alternative means available, rather there must be a reasonable “fit” between the goal and the means chosen
    - - Content-based (based on viewpoint or subject matter)
        
        Strict Scruitny
      - Content-neutral
        
        Intermediate Scruitny
      - Time place manner framework: Speech restrictions on Government Property(forum analysis). 1) what type of forum? 2) what regulation? 3) Test?
        
        Traditional Public Forums and Designated Public Forums: historically been open to speech-related activities (for example: street, sidewalk, and public parks)
        
        Levels of Scruitny: if content based-->strict if its content neut-->intermedialte
        
        Limited Public Forums (limited range of subjects) and Nonpiblic Forums:
        
        Valid if viewpoint neutral and reasonably related to a legitimate government purpose. IF the regulation is viewpoint based, it will be subject to strict scruitny
        
        Other than streets, sidewalks, parks, and designated public forums, most public property (including a court building and its grounds) is considered to be a limited public forum or a nonpublic forum. The government can regulate speech in such a forum to reserve the forum for its intended use. Regulations will be upheld as long as they are (i) viewpoint neutral, and (ii) reasonably related to a legitimate government purpose. Burden on the challenger
        
        While the content of speech generally cannot be limited, the conduct associated with speech in public forums can be regulated by reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. To avoid strict scrutiny and be upheld, such a regulation must be content neutral, narrowly tailored to serve an important government interest, and leave open alternative channels of communication.
      - Speech Restrictions in Public Schools
        
        Personal student speech on campus: cannot be censored absent evidence of substantial disruption. Exception: speech promoting illegal drug use does not require showing of any disruption or credible threat of disruption
        
        Personal student speech off campus: harder to censor
        
        School speech: restrictions on speech related to the school's teaching and by students as part of curricular or extracurricular activities must be reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns
      - Speech in Public Employment
        
        Unprotected: if a government employee speech while at work in roles a matter of private concern, the employer can punish the employee if the speech was disruptive of the work environment.
        
        Protected: public concern but is bot made pursuant to the employee's official duties-->courts will use a balancing test weighing the value of the speech against the government's interest in the efficient operation of the workplace.
  - - - The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from taking action respecting the establishment of religion. Where no sect preference is involved, government action will be upheld if it serves a secular purpose, its primary effect neither advances nor inhibits religion, and it does not produce excessive government entanglements with religion.
    - - The Free Exercise Clause prohibits government from punishing religious belief. The Clause prevents government from punishing conduct merely because it is religious and from regulating conduct for the purpose of interfering with religion. However, the Clause does not prohibit government from regulating general conduct, even if the regulation happens to interfere with a person’s ability to conform conduct to sincerely held religious beliefs
- - - - Taking
        
        Development exception:
        
        Emergency exception
    - - If a government regulation denies a landowner all economic use of his land, the regulation generally will constitute a "taking" requiring the payment of "just compensation" under the Fifth Amendment. However, regulations that merely decrease the value of property do not necessarily result in a taking as long as there remains an economically viable use for the property. The court will consider (i) the social goals sought to be promoted, (ii) the diminution in value to the owner, and (iii) whether the regulation substantially interferes with distinct, investment-backed objectives.