Lyons case- choking?
In gen
Constitutional violations distinguish between equal protection and due process.
P can have more than one avenue to get relief and can only have one remedy
Alternative avenues to get there. Justice O’Conner “what’s better, what’s not?”
Catch-all phrase- express rights under the constitution, rights related to the criminally accused, 14th Amendment
5th Amendment is related to Federal and 14th Related to State
-Right to process, opportunity to be heard and the steps against one taken
-Procedural Due Process- Castle rock, Right procedure, etc.
Post/Pre Deprivation
Substantive Due Process falls under Unnamed Rights
Unnamed economic rights are rights that can be
Privacy Rights- Strict Scrutiny
Sexual Orientation- Not Strict Scrutiny
Equal protection relating to states- 14th
Due Process- 5th Bowling v. Sharp
Skinner v. Oklahoma- Equal protection, person being sterilized, chicken thieves, embezzlement not
Equal protections look out for similarly situated groups being treated differently and involves fundamental rights which involve strict scrutiny.
Privacy- strict scrutiny would apply
Similarly situated- look to outdated norms
Equal protection based on gender- intermediate level of scrutiny
Parental/Privacy rights - strict scrutiny
14th amendment- Privileges/Immunities- Slaughter house cases
Denying national privileges/immunities (could be other cases)
Justice Thomas
PrivC- There was a type on exam
Look to email on how to right law school exams by professor
When you have strict scrutiny go through analysis but assuming arguendo its midlevel, then we argue. Do not delete issues put them all in and spend time according to importance.
Creative leaps aren’t bad, but make sure you have a solid foundation and go for it. Stick to the book
MJ
White female classmates did not disclosure their gender, similar GPAs with white males, and they were accepted, nonwhite-females with similar GPAs were accepted. Didn’t tell them they were women.
BIG U- Assume they took funding, MJ- Second full paragraph on pg. 3. Very broad as to reasons why she was denied. This would go towards symbiotic relationship, if private school, would be different (Moose Lodge).
Prong 2 of test- not more than 60% of once race. (Bakke)
Quota issue/legacy seats quota, reverse discrimination, cases dealing with race and gender who aren’t white. In line with rational basis test and scholarships
Spending clause issue- South Dakota v. Doe- test, congress can encourage but not coerce.
MJ is a white female- her facts are more complex, not better or less qualified.
Illusions of qualifications/use story to figure out if it matters
Don’t mention states privileges and immunities on exam
Tee
Impeachment from federal positions- have to apply to someone holding office, citizen
Political questions doctrine- pg. 15, Nixon v. US
Roll through branches of the federal government- States, People, Courts
Some matters Courts should not be involved with
Baker v Carr- look at a number of factors to determine if there is a political question present
Justiciability- In order for a court to hear the merits, need subject matter jurisdiction/Article 3 must be a case of controversy before it can reach the merits and needs to be justiciable for the court to thus reach those merits
If Political Question doctrine, not justiciable
Nixon v. US- Articles of impeachment, Political question stay out of it, assume arguendo it is, now you have to proceed further (do both)
Reference Powell v. McCormick as to whether you can take your seat in Congress. The house shall have authority to judge qualifications. Congress can’t add new things. Not a political question, was justiciable, argue both sides. Just reach a conclusion.
Need to be of a certain age to be in Congress.
28 and has been a member of congress for 6 years (age issues?)
Wants to sue everyone she can, what suits can she bring? Would claims be justiciable?
Concerned going off to war
Is she the one to bring the suit about EDCATE and FRESH2U. What justiciability and how to structure?
-Wicker is the outer limits of the commerce power/look to BBQ case.
-US v. Morrison- violence against women, Morrison v. Lopez
Authority to do this?
1-8-18 and 1-8-1 coupled with necessary and proper clause
US v. Morrison pg. 48.- Expansion of necessary and proper clause. Separate and independent power.
Health of the City- Can Congress do with the clauses?
Does Brady compel? Or was congress overstepping their bounds?
State must mandate city zoning laws. Pg. 204. FRESH2U
Lots of people complaining about their harm, the businesses are pulling out of the city.
Extra credit assignment with the bank, very helpful in working into that.
Draft issue, indivuals does not mean it is restricted to just men
Exceptions- in fact pattern
Concept of marriage, does it belong to the individual?
War on terror, have to write about it
Supreme court held that a taxpayer has standing to bring suit as to their own taxes. Does not have standing generally to bring suit on how they are spent. Has standing to bring suit if in violation of establishment clause
Does not have spending to bring suit if congress is giving property to churches (ALSO APPLIES TO MJ/POSSIBLY THE ONE NEEDING TO BRING SUIT INSTEAD OF T)
nxr.ta
conlawnotes.docx
0
