Constitutional Law II - Bracey - Spring 2010

8/11/2019 Constitutional Law II - Bracey - Spring 2010

1/34

Constitutional Law 2 OutlineConstitutional Law 2 Outline

Professor BraceyProfessor Bracey

GW LAW, Spring 2010GW LAW, Spring 2010

I. II. INTRODUCTIONNTRODUCTIONTOTOIINDIVIDUALNDIVIDUALRRIGHTSIGHTSANDANDTHETHECCONSTITUTIONONSTITUTION

A A!en"!entsa. 13th Amendment Abolish Slavery

i. #eit$er sla%ery nor in%oluntary ser%itu"e, e&cept as a punis$!ent for cri!ew$ereof t$e party s$all $a%e 'een "uly con%icte", s$all e&ist wit$in t$e

(nite" States, or any place su')ect to t$eir )uris"ictionb. 14th Amendment Due Process & Equal Protection

i. Section 1.All persons 'orn or naturali*e" in t$e (nite" States, an" su')ectto t$e )uris"iction t$ereof, are citi*ens of t$e (nite" States an" of t$e Statew$erein t$ey resi"e #o State s$all !a+e or enforce any law w$ic$ s$alla'ri"ge

1 t$e privileges or immnitiesof citi*ens of t$e (nite" States-2 nor s$all any State "epri%e any person of life, li'erty, or property,

wit$out !e processof law-. nor "eny to any person wit$in its )uris"iction t$e e"#l protectionof

t$e laws

B /$eories of Constitutional nterpretation#. Gener#ll$

i. We "e'ate t$ese t$eories 'ecause t$ey "ene $ow !any rig$ts we $a%e1 f a 'roa" interpretation !ore rig$ts2 f a narrow interpretation less rig$ts

ii. W$en you c$oose your t$eory of interpretation, you pregure t$e scope an" itwill tell you w$ats i!portant t$e sta+es are $ig$

iii. We li+e to t$in+ t$at t$e constitution is interprete" 'y principle an" notpolitics

1 ts suppose" to en"ure, s$oul" 'e a'o%e t$e fray of politics%. Origin#lism

i. 3enitionLoo&s to '(#t t(e )r#mers (#! in min! *intent+ '(en

t(e$ 'rote t(e constittionii. Soft % 4ar" Originalis!

1 Soft5 W$at woul" t$e fra!ers say now62 4ar"5 /e&tualists "ont stray fro! original !eaning

iii. 7&a!ple Pu'lic 7"ucation1 4ar" not !entione" e&plicitly in t$e Constitution2 Soft Constitution tal+s a'out e8uality, can 'e applie" to pu'lic

sc$oolsiv. Pro'le!s

1 9ay 'e "i:cult to "eter!ine original intent2 Coul" reac$ a le%el of e&traction w$ere our co!fort le%el "i!inis$es


2/34

. 3ou't t$at suc$ an ol" "ocu!ent s$oul" 'in" future generationsc. ,or#l Argments - D'or&in

i. Originalis! !ust 'e re)ecte" 'ecause it "oesnt ;t< our tra"ition an" "oesnot ;)ustify< it

ii. !ges mst se e/p#nsive protection o) (m#n rig(ts.iii. (se ;'est constructi%e account< of e&isting legal !aterials 'y putting

constitutional te&t in 'est possi'le lig$tiv. Pro'le!s

1 A!'iguity if Constitution is fore%er e%ol%ing, w$at are t$e li!itations62 Life cycle on !orals an" %alues, $ow an" w$en "o we a'an"on t$e!6. W$y s$oul" any )u"ge 'e a'le to i!pose !orality on people %ia t$e

Constitution!. N#tr#l L#' - N#tr#l Rig(ts

i. /$ere is a (ig(er l#' t(#t ever$one n!erst#n!s, unwritten co"e )u"gess$oul" +now

ii. Pro'le!1 #o single, !oral, correct rea"ing of t$e constitution2 W$o "eci"es6

e. Represent#tion0Rein)orcementi. We s$oul" all 'e soft originalists w$en its relati%ely una!'iguousii. /$is s$oul" en$ance "e!ocratic %alues an" representationiii. Pro'le!s

1 W$o "eci"es62 4ow representati%e s$oul" t$e (S 'e6. Se%eral issues "ont t into t$is sc$e!e =a'ortion>

II. EII. EUALIT2UALIT2ANDANDTHETHECCONSTITUTIONONSTITUTION

A Sla%ery an" Segregation5 /$e Origins of 78ual Protection#. State % Post =SC of #? 1@> s sla%ery legal in #?6

i. acts1. Statute in #? saying t$at sla%es 'orn after 1@0 are free- Sla%ery

inten"e" to "ie out2. State constitution "eclare" all !en to 'e free an" e8ual3. Pro'le! fe"eral go%ern!ent still recogni*es sla%ery

ii. Court1. S$oul" not loo+ to !orality

a. ;)u"ges !ust 'e !ore t$an !en Stan"ing E Legality of 9issouri Co!pro!ise

i. acts1. Scott is a sla%e w$o was once li%ing in free territory2. 4e !o%e" 'ac+ to 9issouri, a sla%ery state

ii. Court1. 4e "oes not $a%e stan"ing to sue 'Ec not a citi*en of any state 'Ec $e

is property2. Struc+ "own t$e 9issouri Co!pro!ise w$ic$ sai" so!e states coul" 'e

sla%e freeiii. #otes


3/34

1. Cort #ttempte! to solve complic#te! politic#l isse2. By constitutionali*ing t$e issue it too+ t$e pro'le! away fro! politics

a. W$at were t$e i!plications of t$is6i. #o way out of t$e sla%ery 8uestion %ia politicsii. Create" ra"icalis! fuele" t$e ci%il war 'ecause people

+new t$ey coul"nt count on t$e legal process to ac$ie%et$eir outco!es

3. 4oster c(il! )or 5!ici#l #ctivism4. Pro'le!s =fro! 'oo+>

a. Court unnecessarily an" unwisely reac$e" out to "eci"e an issuenot properly presente"

b. Courts "ecision is racist in its pre!ise an" !orally o'tuse in itsresult

c. Court unwisely assu!e" t$at it coul" nally resol%e a "i%isepolitical issue 'y ta+ing it ;out of politics an" social rig$ts =socialacco!!o"ations>ii. Court

1. 4ol"ing CJA is in%ali"a. Cort s#$s 7rnning sl#ver$ #rgment into t(e gron!8b. 19t( #men!ment !i!n:t give congression#l #t(orit$ to

regl#te soci#l livesc. No st#te #ction #n! 1;t( #men!. onl$ protects #g#inst

st#te #ctions< not priv#te !iscrimin#tion

e. Plessy % erguson =1@K> Sep#r#te is Constittion#li. acts

1. Plessy is 1E@t$'lac+, FE@t$s w$ite

2. Prosecute" cri!inally for sitting in a w$ite railroa" train car3. ;78ual 'ut separate< policyii. Court =Brown> soft originalis!

1. 1;t( Amen!ment ONL2 #pplies to politic#l ine"#lit$ #n! not tosoci#l ine"#lit$

a. Political rig$ts sit on )ury, own property, sign contracts, etcb. Social rig$ts e8ual access to pu'lic acco!!o"ations,

integrate" sc$oolsc. MM 1t$ a! #ot !eant to reac$ social rig$ts

2. Or"inance isnt "iscri!ination 'ut is a ;"istinction< t$at applies e8uallyto 'lac+sEw$ites

3. Court says it !ust 'e ;reasona'le

1. 7&pansi%e rea"ing of in!ivi!#l rig$ts protections p#r#!igm s(i)t -ne' #ppro#c(

a. S(i)t to grop %#se! constittion rig(tb. nterprets e8ual protection clause in !o"ern "ay circu!stances,

not as it was inten"e" at ti!e of enact!ent2. #arrow $ol"ing

a. ?ust a'out pu'lic e"ucationiii. #otes

1. 78ual protection clause now roote" in ;co!!on sense

(. PostBrown H /$e 3e ?ureE 3e acto 3istinction an" Li!its on t$e ConstitutionsJe!e"ial Power

i. Green v. County Sch. Bd.=1K@>1. ree"o! of c$oice, provi!ing st!ents 'it( t(e option to c(oose

'(ere t(e$ col! #tten! is not enog(

2. 9an"ates unitary syste! group rig$ts not in"i%i"ual rig$ts structural re!e"y

ii. Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg=1KF1> 'using syste!1. Constitutional co!!an" !oesn:t me#n t(#t ever$ sc(ool in ever$

commnit$ mst #l'#$s re>ect t(e r#ci#l compositionof t$esc$ool syste! as a w$ole

2. 9 principles to gi!e sc(ool !esegreg#tiona. (nconstitutional to purposely !anipulate sc$ools racial

co!positionb. Scope of )u"icial power li!ite" 'y scope of constitutional

%iolation


6/34

c. Once sc$ool $as ;unitary< status, )u"icial inter%ention s$oul"cease

iii. 3enitions1. 3e ?ure re8uire" 'y law

2. 3e actow$at $appens in fact alt$oug$ not re8uire" 'y law

iv. Milliken v. Bradley=1KF> Inter!istrict relie) not permitte!1. Courts lac+ power to i!pose inter"istrict "esegregation

a. (nless t$ere is an inter"istrict %iolation or eIects

B Jational Basis Je%iew#. 78ual protection clause now a !a)or "octrinal tool for analy*ing contro%ersies

unrelate" to racei. Clai!s in%ol%e a c$allenge to laws t$at allocate 'enets or i!pose 'ur"ens

on a "ene" class of in"i%i"uals1. W$en go%ern!ent "raws line 'etween fa%ore" an" "isfa%ore" groups

in an i!per!issi'le place

%. Jeal 8uestion !eci!ing i) c(#llenge! cl#ssi?c#tion is permitte!i. /$ree 'asic 8uestions

1. Ho' (#s t(e govt !e?nes t(e grop %eing %ene?te! or%r!ene!@ *t(e me#ns+

2. (#t is t(e go#l t(e govt is prsing@ *t(e en!s+3. Is t(ere # sBcient connection %et'een t(e me#ns #n! t(e

en!s@ *?t-ne/s+ii. SC analy*es t$ese 8uestions on le%els of tiers of scrutiny

c. Jational 'asis re%iew lowest le%el of scrutinyi. 9eansE7n" analysis

1. !ust 'e rationally relate" to so!e go%ern!ent o')ecti%e2. loo+ at state" purpose an" not 'eyon"

ii. N2C Tr#nsit At(. v. e#er *1F+ c#n emplo$er !iscrimin#te onmet(#!one se@

1. acts 7!ployer woul"nt $ire !et$a"one users, t$oug$t it unsafe

2. Court =Ste%ens>

a. Hol!ing !oes not viol#te e"#l protection cl#se %-ci. not 7# cl#ss o) persons c(#r#cterie! %$ some

npopl#r tr#it or #Bli#tion8ii. N2C (#! re#son s#)et$ #n! reli#%ilit$

b. W$en t$ere are rules t$at treat people "iIerently t$at "onttrigger concerns a'out !a)oritarian 'ias t$en t$e court s$oul"not interfere

i. ;Legislati%e classications are %ali" unless t$ere is #OJA/O#AL relations$ip to t$e States o')ecti%e an"

try to "ene t$e actual, un"erlying !oti%e an" "eter!ine if t$at constitutes alegiti!ate go%ern!ent purpose

1. City of Cle'urne, 9oreno

ii. W$at triggers t$is61. W$en re8uire!ent "oesnt $a%e anyt$ing to "o wit$ state" goal

a. 9oreno2. hen !rou"s are race#li$e %i.e. share immutable characteristic

a. 9oreno =!entally "isa'le">, Jo!er =gays>, ageb. W$ere to "raw t$e line6 (n+nown

i. i"s 'orn out of we"loc+6 Poor people63. /$e area in w$ic$ t$e regulation is ta+ing place

iii. US Dept. o) Agricltre v. ,oreno *1F9+1. acts 7&clu"e" fro! participation in t$e foo" sta!p progra! any

$ouse$ol" containing an in"i%i"ual w$o was unrelate" to any ot$er!e!'er of t$e $ouse$ol"

2. CourtPro%ision is unconstitutional 'Eca. Purpose of foo" sta!ps nutrition an" increase agriculture

econo!iesi. E/tr# re"irement !oesn:t (#ve #n$t(ing to !o 'it(

t(e go#l3. #otes

a. Pro%ision actually was !eant to 'e anti$ippieEco!!unesiv. Cit$ o) Cle%rne v. Cle%rne Living Ctr. *1+ ment#ll$ ret#r!e!

1. acts City allowe" a %ariety of structures to 'e 'uilt on certain plot

of lan" 'ut specically e&clu"e" certain structures group $o!es for!entally retar"e", insane or "rug a""icts /$en, special per!itre8uire"

2. Court =W$ite>a. Go%ern!ent "i" #O/ $a%e a legiti!ate go%ern!ent o')ecti%e

i. 4ig$ sc$ool near'y, structure on Qoo" plainEunsafeb. Base" on irrational pre)u"ice against !entally retar"e"

i. Loo+s at !a)oritarian 'ias pierces t$e %eil1. Cort is 'illing to loo& %e$on! t(e st#te!

prpose to ?n! t(#t t(e motives #reillegitim#te t(is is RATIONAL ASIS J ITE

ii. ;"iscri!ination is at t$e $eart of t$e citys "ecisionb. Loo+s li+e race, ie so!ew$at i!!uta'le

3. 3issent =Scalia> !orals- go%t un"er no o'ligation to protect lifestyle

c$oicee. 9easure!ent of 78ualityi. 9ay 'e !easure" wit$ respect to for!al treat!ent sa!e selection regi!eii. 9ay 'e !easure" wit$ respect to outco!es sa!e le%el of 'enet ac$ie%e"iii. /$e tric+ to ac$ie%ing Const per!issi'le treat!ent is to gure out w$ic$

"iIerences an" w$ic$ si!ilarities are rele%ant as a Const 'attle

). (n"erinclusion % O%erinclusioni. Not # pro%lem n!er r#tion#l %#sis revie'ii. O%erinclusion

1. Bea*er so!e !et$a"one wor+ers will 'e safeEe:cient wor+ersa. S$oul" stri+e 'alance

i. Weig$ t$e i!portance of safety against t$e i!portance of

e!ploy!ent an" t$en "iscount eac$ si"e of t$e e8uation'y t$e ris+ of error

iii. (n"erinclusion1. Bea*er "oes not inclu"e reco%ering alco$olics, !ental patients,

"ia'etics, etciv. 3i:cult to write legislation t$at is neit$erv. Bot$ are constitutionally 8uestiona'le un"er $eig$tene" scrutiny

vi. 7!ploy!ent1. n%ol%es "iscretionary "ecisions, t$us o+ay to treat people "iIerently

C Strict Scrutiny an" t$e Pro'le! of Jace#. O%er%iew

i. 3enition1. Je8uires co!pelling go%ern!ent o')ecti%e 'eing soug$t N narrowly

tailore"ii. est c#se )or (eig(tene! revie' is )or cl#ssi?c#tions %#se! on r#ceiii. 3isparate i!pact #O/ PJO/7C/73 =Washington v. Davis>

1. #ee" to pro%ea. 3iscri!inatory intent or purpose A#3b. 3iscri!inatory eIects

2. Ci%il Jig$ts Act pro%i"es so!e "isparate i!pact reliefa. O%erlap $ere

iv. As& Does it constitte # r#ci#l cl#ssi?c#tion@

1. Desa. f e&plicitly "raws on racial lines OJ !oti%ate" 'y a racial

purposei. Strict scrutiny analysis

1. Only s$owing of n#rro' t#iloring J overri!inggovernment#l interest can o%erco!e t$einference t$at t$e classication was !oti%ate" 'y a"esire to $ar! t$e !inority

a #o 'rig$t line rule for narrow tailoringii. Court will pro'a'ly in%ali"ate it

2. #oa. f classication is nonrace specic


9/34

i. Jational 'asis re%iew "espite "isparate i!pact on!onitory group

ii. Court will pro'a'ly up$ol" it3. Mixed Motives (rlington !eights exa"#le $ town doesn%t want

"inorities or #oor #eo#le (not a #rotected class&&a. Still $a%e to s$ow "irect proof 'ut w$ere t$e !oti%e is !i&e"

i. you can s$ow "irect proof of 'ot$ A#3ii. t$en 'ur"en s$ifts "efense !ust s$ow t$at outco!e

woul" $a%e 'een t$e sa!eb. 7&ception 4istory an" 7Iects

i. So!eti!es a co!'ination of $istory as well as eIects can'e enoug$ to create an inference of 'a" intentions or"iscri!inatory purpose 7&actly w$en co!'o is rig$t an"Court will infer t$is is unclear

1. 7&a!ple Jogers % Lo"ge =%oting conte&t>. #O/ in cri!inal )ustice conte&t

%. Origins H Jationale for 4eig$tene" Scrutiny in JaceSpecic Classicationsi. Strau"er % WR =1@@0> ?ury Selection

1. acts Strau"er is a 'lac+ !an con%icte" of !ur"er 'efore all w$ite

)ury WR statute t$at li!its )ury ser%ice to all w$ite !en 21 an" ol"er

2. Court(nconstitutionala. Denie! t(e !e)en!#nt e"#l protection o) t(e l#'sb. Broa", 'ut purposeful rea"ing of t$e 7P Clause

i. Says was !eant to gi%e special protection to 'lac+sc. Group is single" out an" "enie" a rig$t of citi*ens$ip

i. ?ury ser%ice, %oting are signicant rig$tsii. ore!atsu % (S =1K> ?apanese ntern!ent

1. acts ?apanese put in internment c#mpsor or"ere" to o'ey

curfew PlaintiI is con%icte" an" trie" for %iolating an e&ecuti%e or"erto %acate $is $o!e

2. CourtConstitutional

a. 7All leg#l restrictions '(ic( crt#il t(e civil rig(ts o) #

single r#ci#l grop #re imme!i#tel$ sspect8b. Constitutionally %ali" policy e%en wit$ ele%ate" scrutiny

i. Jacial classications are 'a" 'ut if you $a%e a really goo"reason it can tru!p t$e s+epticis!

1. 4ere it was 'ecause of !ilitary necessity3. #otes

a. f t$ere are o%er inclusi%ely pro'le!s =loyal ?apanese 'eingswept up> B(/ t$eres also un"erinclusi%ity pro'le!s =notGer!ans or talians>

i. 4ow woul" you gauge t$e courts "ecision wit$ t$is in!in"6

1. /$ese policies are o+ay as long as t$ere is a goo"

enoug$ reasoniii. Lo%ing % Rirginia =1KF> 1st c#se to #rticl#te !i3erent st#n!#r! o)

revie'1. acts Rirginia $a" statute to pre%ent interracial !arriages to

preser%e ;racial integrity< an" pre%ent ;corruption of 'loo"< an"creation of ;!ongrel 'ree" of citi*ensiv. Pal!ore % Si"oti =1K@> c$il" custo"y


10/34

1. acts 9o! awar"e" custo"y in "i%orce 9o! re!arries a 'lac+ !an

an" court awar"s custo"y to fat$er now2. Court(nconstitutional

a. 4ere, court i"enties co!pelling o')ecti%e an" narrowly tailore"!eans B(/ Court unani!ously re)ect argu!ent t$at t$is casemeets strict scrtin$

i. W$y6 Because csto!$ !ecisions c#nnot give e3ectto priv#te %i#ses /$e custo"y "ecision "isfa%ors racial!inorities wit$ respect to perpetuating !a)ority 'ias

v. 4unter % 7ric+son =1KK> $ousing1. acts

a. A+ron, O$io passe" fair $ousing or"inance t$at pro$i'ite" racial"iscri!ination in real estate transactions

b. /$en a!en"!ent passe" t$at or"inances regulating real estatetransactions ;on t$e 'asis of race, color, religion, national origin,or ancestry< $a" to 'e appro%e" 'y t$e %oters 'efore ta+ingeIect

2. Court(nconstitutional

a. Amen!ment serve! no compelling government prposeb. Pro'le! is !anipulation of "e!ocratic process to create special

'arriers to enact legislation "esigne" to "isfa%or !inorities4ere, t$ere was e&press racial classication

c. acially #onracial Classications t$at 3isa"%antage Jacial 9inoritiesi. Was$ington % 3a%is =1KF> Disp#r#te Imp#ct NOT protecte! INTENT

J 4UR4OSE REUIRED1. acts

a. PlaintiIs c$allenge test t$at is gi%en to police o:cers to get )o'Clai! not relia'le pre"ictor of )o' perfor!ance an" !orei!portantly t$at 'ecause t$at test was c$allenging on so!ele%el to 'lac+s, w$o "i" not pass at sa!e le%el as w$ite, wasracially "iscri!inatory

2. CourtConstitutionally Rali"

a. /$e re8uire!ent to 'eco!e a police o:cer was not "one topurposely e&clu"e 'lac+s- no in%i"ious intention

b. E3ects #re not enog(. In or!er to trigger strict scrtin$4 (#s to provi!e proo) o) !iscrimin#tor$ prpose-intentAND e3ect

i. Constitution "oes ') #rotect against dis#arate i"#act3. #otes

a. f "isparate i!pact were unconstitutional lots of legislationwoul" 'e unconstitutional 'ecause of all t$e ine8uality out t$ere

b. Laws treat people "iIerently E une8ual all t$e ti!e ne8ualitye&ists

ii. ,i/e! ,otives

1. Arlington 4eig$ts % 9etropolitan 4ousing 3e%elop!ent Corp =1KFF>a. acts

i. 3e%elop!ent co!pany applies for per!it to re*one toper!it construction of lower inco!e $ousing

ii. Denie! permit< ses on constittion#l gron!s#rging t(#t

1. vill#ge:s !ecision to re)se to reone '#s #racially motivated !iscrimin#tor$ !ecision*%-c r#ce o)ten correl#te! 'it( cl#ss+

b. CourtConstitutionally per!issi'le


11/34

i. Nee! DIRECT proo) o) illicit prpose i) mi/e!motives

ii. So!e argue t$at s$oul" loo+ at natural an" pro'a'leconse8uences to "eter!ine purpose

1. Court re)ects too close to an eIects test2. Jo"gers % Lo"ge =1K@2>

a. actsi. l#c& constitents c(#llenge #t l#rge election.ii. Pro'le! is t$at no 'lac+ !e!'ers $a%e 'een electe" to

county 'oar" of co!!issioners "espite fact t$at !a)orityof countys resi"ents are 'lac+

b. Court(nconstitutional

i. #ot set up on purpose to "isa"%antage !inoritiesii. B(/ n"s country $a" retaine" structure for illicit

purposes1. Purpose was not constitutional w$en enacte". But WAS after t$ey retaine" it

c. #otei. So)tening o) ashin!ton v. Davisst#n!#r! o) !irect

proo)< #t le#st in voting conte/t

!. #ote on 3istincti%e Pro'le!s in t$e A"!inistration of Cri!inal ?usticei. 9cCles+ey % e!p =1K@F>1. acts

a. Blac+ !an con%icte" for !ur"ering w$ite police o:cer an"sentence" to "eat$ 4e clai!s t$e capital sentencing sc$e!e isracially !oti%ate" Cites Bal"us stu"y t$at conclu"es t$at capitacon%ictions "ecisions are !oti%ate" 'y race

2. CourtConstitutionally %ali"

a. Conce"es t$at t$e stats fro! stu"y "o s$ow 'lac+s are"isproportionately e&ecute" B(/ insu:cient to sur!ount t$e'ur"en of proof fro! Washington v. Davis

b. 3iscri!inatory purpose re8uires t$at t$e action 'e ta+en

B7CA(S7 of, not !erely in spite of, its eIects of a particularclassi. Legislature woul" $a%e $a" to $a%e enacte" capital

sentencing 'ecause of its "isparate i!pact on 'lac+sii. 3i" not pro%e "iscri!ination on in"i%i"ual 'asis

c. 4ol"ing#ee" 3J7C/ e%i"ence of racial ani!us, strong

inference not enoug$

e. JaceSpecic Classications 3esigne" to Benet Jacial 9inorities=A:r!ati%e Action>

i. Overvie'1. /ypical )ustications for AA

a. re!e"ying prior "iscri!ination

i. S$oul" we focus on past P(BLC "iscri!ination or PJRA/7"iscri!ination6 W$ic$ one pro'a'ly !ore pro'le!atic6

b. to en$ance "i%ersity =Bollingerfactors>i. Allows critical !ass of !inority stu"ents to !atriculate

w$ic$ pro!otes crossracial un"erstan"ing, 'rea+s "ownstereotypes, etc

ii. 9a+es for 'etter wor+ers an" citi*ens1. But w$o "oes t$is 'enet accrue6 7!ployers,

!ilitary


12/34

iii. 3esperate nee" to pro!ote lea"ers wit$ "i%ersity =nee"to $a%e pat$ways open to all in or"er to legiti!i*e t$osew$o 'eco!e lea"ers in t$e eyes of all>

2. Strict Scrutiny also applies $ere for JAC7 =Crosen>a. #otice $ow t$e court is s(i)ting its )ocs )rom grop0%#se!

protections to in!ivi!#l0%#se! rig(ts protectionsb. Also touc$es upon t$e +in"s of )ustications for co!pelling

interests t$at a court will accept fro! t$e state w$en e%aluatingw$et$er AA progra! can e&ist

i. Cannot 'e use" to re!e"y societal "iscri!inationii. Can it 'e use" to re!e"y syste!atic pri%ate

"iscri!ination6 See!s noiii. 9ust also 'e narrowly tailore" N co!pelling interest

c. 3irect proof always 'est =Was$ington % 3a%is>i. But t$is is a $ig$ 'ur"en

d. AA !ust 'e for SP7CC PAS/ WJO#GSe. uotas fail

i. Because t$ey are not narrowly tailore"3. AA for wo!en gets inter!e"iate Scrutiny

a. /$us easier to !a+e progra!s for t$e!ii. AA in Contr#cts 'it( Government

1. City of Jic$!on" % Croson =1K@K>a. acts

i. Jic$!on" city council !ust awar" .0T of su'contracts to!inority 'usiness enterprises =9B7>


i. Applies strict scrtin$=for all racial classications use"'y state go%t regar"less of w$ic$ races are 'enete" an"w$ic$ ones are $ar!e">

1. #o co!pelling o')ecti%e 'y city. #ot narrowly tailore"

ii. T(ere is NO rig(t to AA

2. A"ara'" Constructors, nc % Pena =1KK>a. actsi. P su'!itte" a low 'i" 'ut wasnt gi%en t$e )o', suesii. Argues t$at t$e policy t$at prefers !inority %iolate" t$e

t$ a!en"!entb. Court(nconstitutional

i. #ot narrowly tailore" N "oes not furt$er co!pelling go%tinterest

ii. ALL levels o) government *)e!-st#te-loc#l+ '(op#rticip#te in AA progr#ms mst %e ev#l#te! onstrict scrtin$ %#sis

iii. Hol!ing AA onl$ o$ to reme!$ speci?c polic$

iii. AA in 4%lic E!c#tion1. Grutter % Bollinger =200.>a. acts

i. (9 law sc$ool $a" AA policy W$ite resi"ent of 9 w$owas re)ecte" 'roug$t suit, clai!ing t$at s$e $a" not 'eena"!itte" 'Ec law sc$ool relie" on race

b. CourtConstitutionally %ali"

i. 3i%ersity is a co!pelling go%t interest all stu"ents'enet N "eference to (9

ii. Hol!ing2o CAN se AA %t $o (#ve to se

7speci#l c#re8 to !o it


13/34

1. #o 8uotas, un"ene" 'oost o+ay2. Grat* % Bollinger =200.>

a. actsi. A"!issions to t$e un"ergra" (9 on a point syste! Bonus

20 points if you are a !inorityb. Court(nconstitutional

i. Point syste! auto!atically ga%e 20 points to applicantsan" it $a" t$e eIect of !a+ing it "ecisi%e

ii. #ot narrowly tailore"iv. Note on R#ce Speci?c Voting Districts

1. so!eti!es go%ern!ents will "raw "istricts so !inorities can 'e t$e!a)ority

2. t$in+ a'out t$is as AA in %oting trying to get a particular outco!et$is way

3. SCO/(S = !a)or cases>a. 9ust !eet strict scrutiny

i. But !ay not 'e as strict as we $a%e seen in ot$erconte&ts

b. Riolation occurs w$en race is t$e pre"o!inant factor in "rawinglegislati%e "istricts

i. 7&a!ples1. S$aw % Jeno ;"u!''ell "istrict

a State "i" not ta+e usual patterns for"istricting

c. /$e 'igger t$e group in)ury t$e greater t$e in)ury4. Jace % Cayetano =2000> n"igenous Peoples

a. acts Roter statute t$at li!its %oting to nati%e 4awaiians or

t$ose of 4awaiian "escent to certain electe" o:cialb. Court(nconstitutional

i. /ri'es are fe"erally recogni*e", 4awaii is )ust a statev. S$nt(esis o) ro'n #n! AA

1. W$at is relations$ip 'Ew Brown =!o%e!ent to "esegregate> an" AA6a. AA was to pro!ote t$e aspirations of Brownb. /o pro!ote an" integrate for!ally oppresse" population

2. Parents n%ol%e" in Co!! Sc$ools % Seattle Sc$ool 3ist =200F>a. acts

i. two sc$ool "istricts w$o wante" to ensure t$at eac$sc$ool wit$in t$eir "istrict was racially 'alance"

1. 10 $ig$ sc$ools in t$e "istrict an" so!e are 'etter

t$an ot$ersii. Sc$ool assign!ents after a certain point were !a"e ont$e 'asis of race, coul" ran+ sc$ools

iii. Stu"ents coul" as+ for transfers 'ut not if t$ere was nospace or if it woul" "estroy racial 'alance


i. #O/ a co!pelling go%ern!ent interest1. racial 'alancing fails in a'sence of a specic n"ing

of "e )ure segregationii. #O/ narrowly tailore" eit$er


14/34

3 78ual Protection5 nter!e"iate Scrutiny an" t$e Pro'le! of Gen"er

#. 7arly casesi. Generally

1. Concerne" wit$ "elicacy of wo!an, protecti%e of t$e! E paternalistic2. /$oug$t t$at !en woul" ta+e care of wo!en in pri%ate sector

ii. Bra"well % llinois up$el" "enying a wo!an t$e rig$t to practice lawiii. 9inor % 4appersett sai" wo!en were ;persons< 'ut coul" not %ote

iv. 9uller % Oregon wo!en coul" only wor+ 10 $ours a "ay%. Joa" to nter!e"iate Scrutiny

i. Jee" % Jee" =1KF1> 1st case to in%ali"ate gen"er classication un"er t$e7PC

1. actsa. "a$os law go%erning estates of persons w$o $a" "ie" wEo a will

w$ic$ esta'lis$e" a $ierarc$y of classes of persons eligi'le forappoint!ent as a"!inistrators

b. Pro%i"e" t$at ;of se%eral persons clai!ing an" e8ually entitle"to a"!inister, !ales !ust 'e preferre" to fe!ales intermediate revie' arrives ( e)"ansion

o* +eed1. acts

a. e"eral law says m#le mem%er o) t(e ni)orme! #rme!services col! #tom#tic#ll$clai! $is spouse as a"epen"ent H get larger $ousing allowance E !e"ical 'enets

b. B(/ )em#les col! onl$ !o so i) s(e !emonstr#te!t$at $erspouse was in fact "epen"ent on $er for o%er $alf $is support


a. Riolate" e8ual protection co!ponent of t$e t$ a!en"!ents3P clause

b. Gen!er cl#ssi?c#tions li&e r#ce merit 7close scrtin$8=i!!uta'le c$aracteristics> an" are in$erently suspect

iii. Con)sion ensres1. a$n % S$e%in =1KF> Court up$el" statute pro%i"ing for a property

ta& e&e!ption for wi"ows 'ut not for wi"owers /$oug$t is wo!en!ore nancially nee"y

2. Ge"ul"ig % Aiello =1KF> re)ecte" an attac+ on CAs "isa'ility

insurance progra! t$at e&clu"es pregnancyrelate" "isa'ilities fro!co%erage Only e&e!pts category of illness

iv. Craig % Boren =1KF> soli!i?e! INTER,EDIATE SCRUTIN21. acts O statute pro$i'its t$e sale of 'eer to !ales un"er t$e age of

21 an" fe!ales un"er t$e age of 1@2. Court(nconstitutional

a. #ot su'stantially relate" to an i!portant go%ern!ent o')ecti%ei. Interme!i#te scrtin$ s(ol! %e #pplie!

3. #ote court ne%er e&plains w$y $eig$tene" scrutiny is necessary

c. Arc$aic an" O%er'roa" Generali*ations %ersus ;Jeal< 3iIerencesi. (S % Rirginia =1KK>

1. actsa. Rirginia 9ilitary nstitute =R9> was singlese& pu'lic sc$ool for

!en to prepare t$e! to 'e ;citi*ensol"iers< Wo!en e&clu"e"Lawsuit in 1KK0


15/34

b. Parallel institute create" RA wo!ens nstitute for lea"ers$ip=RWL>

2. Court(nconstitutional per 7PC

a. t$ose see+ing to "efen" a gen"er'ase" go%ern!ent action!ust "e!onstrate an Ue/cee!ingl$ pers#sive 5sti?c#tionUfor t$at action

b. RirginiaVs argu!ents for +eeping t$e fe!ales out wereunpersuasi%e

c. RWL une8ual to R9 not as rigorousii. S$ort !entions wE real "iIerences

1. Jost+er % Gol"'erg =1K@1> Up(el! m#le onl$ !r#)t=real

"iIerence>a. Base" on e&clusion of wo!en fro! co!'atb. Woul" t$is still 'e up$el" to"ay6

2. 9ic$ael 9 % Sono!a County Sup Court =1K@1> Up(el! st#ttor$

r#pe st#ttea. W$ic$ sai" t$at statutory rape is se& wit$ a fe!ale !inor

iii. #guyen % #S =2001> (*eal Di+erence&1. acts

a. 22 year ol" Rietna!ese !an LPJ con%icte" cri!e of !oral

turpitu"e E felony set up for "eportation W$ile pen"ing, $isfat$er atte!pte" to !a+e $i! (SC t$roug$ parentageb. c$il" 'orn a'roa" to un!arrie" parents auto!atically get (SC if

t$e c$il"s !ot$er is (SC w$o $a" 'een li%ing in (S at so!epoint for a year

i. B(/ not w$en fat$er is a (SC nee" ;clear an"con%incing e%i"ence1. acts

a. SSA pro%ision on $ow to pay out 'enets /$ey were calculate"'ase" on a%erage !ont$ly wages =function of salary>

b. n t$is case, wo!en coul" e&clu"e so!e of t$ose low payingsalary years so t$at t$eir a%erage !ont$ly ta+e $o!e woul" 'eincrease" 'ecause cutting out lower nu!'ers /$e eIect was to'oost t$e a%erage salary of a fe!ale retiree

2. Courtconstitutionally %ali"


16/34

a. or&s !irectl$ to reme!$ e3ects o) p#st !iscrimin#tionb. #ot a pro"uct of o%ergenerali*ation a'out status of wo!en no

stereotyping3. #ote5 AA

a. AA for wo!en !ore li+ely to 'e up$el"

7 Se&ual Orientation#. Generally

i. 4ow to "eter!ine se&ual orientation61. Selfi"entication ='ecause t$ere is no i!!uta'le c$aracteristic>ii. So!eti!es people say t$is is rele%antiii. s it a suspect class6

1. 3iscrete, insular !inority2. 3iscri!inate" against3. !!uta'le c$aracteristic

4. 3ont $a%e political power

%. Jo!er % 7%ans =1KK> =Jational Basis Je%iew N B/7>i. acts Legislation 'anne" a'ility to pro!ulgate gay protections in Colora"o

ii. CourtBan is too 'roa" an" un"iIerentiate" "isa'ility on a single group

1. Court pieces t$e %eil t$is law in CO was !oti%ate" 'y s$eer ani!us

against gay people =ie r#tion#l %#sis J %ite>a. #ot wit$in constitutional tra"ition to enact laws li+e t$is

2. Loo+s li+e race, ie so!ew$at i!!uta'le3. 7%eryone is entitle" to non"iscri!ination

a. 4ere gaysEles'ians 'eing treate" "iIerently t$an t$e 'aselinestan"ar"

iii. 3issent =Scalia> !orals- go%t un"er no o'ligation to protect lifestyle c$oice

1. Co!pares to !ur"er, polyga!y, etc

Ot$er Can"i"ates for 4eig$tene" Scrutiny

#. Alienage =not i!!uta'le>i. Generally1. (nli+e race or gen"er alienage is not in%oluntary or i!!uta'le

a. /$ey C4OOS7 to co!e to t$e (S an" t$en can C4OOS7 to'eco!e citi*ens

2. W$at a'out un"ocu!ente" aliens6a. /$ey "i" c$oose to co!e to t$e (S 'ut t$ey cannot c$oose to

'eco!e citi*ensb. But t$ey are #O/ treate" as a suspect class not e%en in t$e way

t$at "ocu!ente" aliens arei. W$y not w$en t$eir status loo+s !ore li+e raceEgen"er6

1. Because t$eir group is "ene" 'y illegal con"uct

3. W$at sorts of classications of aliens are going to 'e for'i""en6a. Only t$ings regar"ing econo!ic, nonpolitical 'enets

i. #ee" to !aintain li%eli$oo"4. e"eral pree!ption issue fe"s t$oug$t to +now w$ats 'est on t$is

ii. Sugar!an % 3ougall =1KF.> w$en conte&t irrele%ant, "iscri!ination notper!itte"

1. actsa. #D statute e&clu"e" aliens fro! all go%t ci%il ser%ice positions

lle" 'y co!petiti%e e&a!ination2. Court(nconstitutional

a. Statute is not narrowly conne" or precise in its application


17/34

b. 4eig$te" scrutiny applie" ='ut $ar" to +now w$at le%el>i. W$y6 3iscrete an" insular group, prone to "iscri!ination,

cannot participate in politics to protect t$e!sel%es3. #ote

a. Alien#ge !iscrimin#tion nconstittion#l %t onl$ in t(econte/ts '(ere #lien#ge s(ol! %e irrelev#nt

b. 4eig$tene" scrutiny D,S ') / ) classi0cationst$atapply to aliens

i. Court says scrutiny will not 'e so "e!an"ing w$en we"eal wit$ !atters r!ly resting wit$in a statesprerogati%e

iii. 7"ucational Jig$ts1. 'y1uist v. Mauclet=1KFF> #D cant "eny nancial ai" to nonciti*en

stu"ents w$o $as neit$er applie" for citi*ens$ip nor $a" a:r!e" t$eirintent to apply as soon as t$ey 'eca!e eligi'le

2. lyer v. Doe=1K@2> /e&as cannot $a%e a policy refusing to pro%i"e

free pu'lic e"ucation to illegally present alien c$il"reniv. Ca'ell % C$a%e*Sali"o =1K@2>

1. (p$el" citi*ens$ip re8uire!ent for pro'ation o:cers2. 2 pronge" test

a. /$e specicity of t$e classication will 'e e&a!ine"5 aclassication t$at is su'stantially o%erinclusi%e or un"erinclusi%eten"s to un"ercut t$e go%ern!ental clai! t$at t$e classicationser%es legiti!ate political en"s

b. 7%en if t$e classication is su:ciently tailore", it m#$ %e#pplie! in t(e p#rticl#r c#se onl$ to;persons $ol"ing stateelecti%e or i!portant nonelecti%e, e&ecuti%e, legislati%epositions in%ali"ate" ci%il ser%ice

co!!ission policy e&clu"ing aliens fro! !ost ci%il ser%ice )o's2. Matthew v. Dia2=1KF> up$el" fe"eral statute li!iting participation

in a fe"eral !e"ical insurance progra! to citi*ens an" aliens w$o $a"'een in (S continuously for N years an" were LPJs

%. Wealt$ Classications =not i!!uta'le>i. Poor people #re not # protecte! cl#ss t(e$ !o not get (eig(tene!

scrtin$1. Onl$ r#tion#l %#sis revie'or !ay'e rational 'asis re%iew plus 'ite2. Je)ection of t$e i"ea t$at ;nancial nee" alone i"entities a suspect

class for purposes of t$e e8ual protection clause

2. San ntonio School Dist. v. *odrigue2 (56=:& Sc$ool raise" !oney

fro! property ta&es #o "iscri!ination to poor on rational 'asis re%iew#o a'solute "epri%ation 7PC "oes not re8uire perfect e8uality insc$ooling

c. Ot$er 3isa"%antage" Groupsi. Cit$ o) Cle%rne v. Cle%rne Living Ctr. *1+ ment#ll$ ret#r!e!

1. acts City allowe" a %ariety of structures to 'e 'uilt on certain plot

of lan" 'ut specically e&clu"e" certain structures group $o!es for!entally retar"e", insane or "rug a""icts /$en, special per!itre8uire"

2. Court (nconstitutional

a. Go%ern!ent "i" #O/ $a%e a legiti!ate go%ern!ent o')ecti%ei. 4ig$ sc$ool near'y, structure on Qoo" plainEunsafe

b. Base" on irrational pre)u"ice against !entally retar"e"i. Loo+s at !a)oritarian 'ias pierces t$e %eil

1. Cort is 'illing to loo& %e$on! t(e st#te!prpose to ?n! t(#t t(e motives #reillegitim#te t(is is RATIONAL ASIS J ITE

ii. ;"iscri!ination is at t$e $eart of t$e citys "ecisionsii. !portant analysis of Cle'urne

1. W$y "oesnt t$e court apply $eig$tene" scrutiny6 /$ey see! to t asuspect class

a. I) 'e !ecl#re sspect cl#ss t(en get (eig(tene! scrtin$#cross t(e %o#r! #n! in some c#ses legisl#tion t(#tcl#ssi?es ment#ll$ ret#r!e! m#&es sense

iii. W$at purpose "oes "esignating a suspect class ser%e61. Goo" part now it s$ifts 'ur"en to state to )ustify w$y its using t$e

classication2. Ba" part creates 'ur"en on legislatures to actually try to "o t$ings

t$at $elp !e!'ers of suspect classes =a:r!ati%e action for !entallyretar"e">

iv. ollowing Cley'urne, Court routinely "enies suspect class to %arious groups non!arital c$il"ren, el"erly

G /$e un"a!ental nterests Prong of 78ual Protection Analysis

#. Originsi. #ew rule $ere laws t$at "istri'ute interests une8ually (#3A97#/AL#/7J7S/ PJO#G.

1. T(ings t(e Cort !eems to %e so )n!#ment#l t(#t legisl#tiont(#t in)ringes on t(#t interest< it triggers strict scrtin$

2. un"a!ental interests $a%e to 'e protecte" e8uallya. not t$at t$e Constitution pro%i"es 'ut rat$er rig$ts t$at t$e

states gi%e an" t$at t$e fe"eral go%ern!ent !ust protect on ane8ual protection 'asis

ii. S+inner % O+la$o!a =1K2> Jig$t to Procreate E 4a%e OIspring1. acts


19/34

a. O $as statute t$at allows for su!!arily sterili*ation for certain$a'itual oIen"ers


a. Rig(t to procre#te is # )n!#ment#l (m#n rig(tb. W$en state classies in a way t$at "enies so fun"a!ental an

interest as procreation, strict scrtin$is essential

%./$e Jig$t to Rotei. ($ # )n!#ment#l interest@

1. "ea is cannot 'e left to process itself2. Jepresentation reinforce!ent !o"el3. Roting is not suppose" to 'e fun"a!ental in t$e constitution it s$oul"

'e 'ase" on t$e fact t$at its roote" as a fun"a!ental ele!ent of"e!ocracy

ii. Deni#l o) t(e Rig(t to Vote1. 4arper % RA Boar" of 7" =1K> poll ta&es are irrele%ant for %oting

a. actsi. Rirginia $a" a poll ta&


i. Voting is )n!#ment#l so strict scrtin$ #ppliesii. Poll ta& cannot stan" 'ecause its a'out wealt$ an"

#%ilit$ to p#$ poll t#/ is not # relev#nt "#li?c#tionto vote2. ra!er % (nion ree Sc$ool 3ist =1KK> %oting restrictions !ust 'e

narrowly tailore"a. acts

i. #D law says in certain #D sc$ool "istricts, resi"ents !ay%ote in sc$ool "istrict election only if t$ey =1> own or leaseta&a'le real property wit$in t$e "istrict, or =2> are parents=or $a%e custo"y of> c$il"ren enrolle" in t$e local pu'licsc$ools


i. 7%en t$oug$ t$ere !ay 'e a legiti!ate go%ern!ent

interest, t$e statute is #O/ narrowly tailore" enoug$iii. Diltion o) t(e Rig(t to Vote

1. Jeynol"s % Si!s =1K> !ust 'e 'ase" on populationa. acts Ala'a!as legislature $as not c$ange" $ow it apportions

=legislati%e "istricts> in 0 years Le" to irrational sc$e!eb. Court(nconstitutional

i. St#tes mst se popl#tion %#se! !istricts #n! t(e!istricts mst %e virt#ll$ i!entic#l in popl#tion

2. City of 9o'ile % Bol"en =1K@0> ;fair representation< syste! not!an"atory

a. acts #o 'lac+ $as e%er 'een electe" as city co!!ission e%en

t$oug$ $ig$ 'lac+ population Clai! at large %oting syste!

"ilutes strengt$ of 'lac+s in 9o'ileb. CourtConstitutional syste!

i. S#$s m#5orit$ rle elections *# 'inner0t#&es0#ll+#re inv#li! ONL2 I= t(e$ #re inten!e! to invi!iosl$minimie %l#c& voting strengt(.

ii. Roting rig$ts "oes #O/ confer a rig$t to electrepresentati%es in proportion to your nu!'ers

iii. Ste%ens gui"elines for )u"ging unconstitutionality1. #ot t$e pro"uct of a !anifest or routine political

"ecision. Signicant a"%erse i!pact on a !inority


20/34

9. /otally irrational or enacte" wit$ intent to curtailpower of !inority

iv. Deni#l o) 7Access to t(e #llot81. Willia!s % J$o"es =1K@>

a. actsi. O4 law sai" t$at political parties t$at $a" recei%e" 10T of

t$e %ote in prior go%ernor election auto!atically 8ualie"for t$e ne&t presi"ential election 'allot Ot$er politicalparties $a" to earn a spot after pro%ing an ela'orate partystructure


i. State laws 'ur"en two t$ings1. Jig$t of in"i%i"uals to associate for t$e

a"%ance!ent of political 'eliefs. Jig$t of 8ualie" %oters to cast t$eir %otes

eIecti%elyii. Co!pelling state interest in !anaging 'allots not enoug$

c. Cri!inal ?ustice Syste!i. Gri:n % llinois =1K> rig$t to court transcripts

1. acts C$arge" in"igents for court transcripts w$en appealing

cri!inal con%ictions2. Court(nconstitutional

a. n"igents $a%e a rig$t to access transcripts wit$out 'ur"en3. to pro%i"e t$ese "efen"ants wit$ a"e8uate an" eIecti%e appellate

re%iewii. 3ouglas % California =1K.> Jig$t to Counsel on Appeal

1. acts Jule saying court woul" e%aluate if in"igents woul" get free

counsel on appeal2. Court(nconstitutional

a. States !ust provi!e in!igents 'it( conselon a rst appealof rig$t to c$allenge a cri!inal con%iction

b. But t$is is not )ust application of Gri:n 'ecause 3ouglas "oes

not !erely for'i" states fro! c$arging a fee, it i!poses an#Brm#tive o%lig#tionon states to pro%i"e counsel for "irectappeals

i. Involves rel#tivel$ r#re interest '(ere cortcre#tes positive rig(ts n!er const< verssneg#tive rig(t t(#t )or%i!s st#te )rom !oingsomet(ing

iii. Bo""ie % C/ =1KF1> rig$t to free "i%orce

1. acts State re8uire!ent t$at in"i%i"uals pay court fees an" costs of

X0 in or"er to sue for "i%orce2. Court(nconstitutional

a. 9arriage is fun"a!ental in our societyb. Courts are necessary for regulari*e" process of "ispute

settle!ent- !onopoly on "i%orcec. 3epri%ation of "ue process of law

3. #otea. /$is "ecision 3O7S #O/ J7AC4 CRL AJ7#A

i. Only pertains to fun"a!ental rig$ts li+e !arriageE"i%orce1. >S v. ?ras "i" not e&ten" to 'an+ruptcy

!./$e Jig$t to /ra%eli. O%er%iew E Jan"o!

1. ,ore )n!#ment#l t(#n t(e rig(t to vote *#ge restrictions ont(#t+


21/34

2. Jesi"ency re8uire!ents for sc$ools $as 'een up$el"a. #ot$ing in$erently wrong a'out a state trying to only 'enet

t$eir own resi"entsii. S$apiro % /$o!pson =1KK>

1. acts Je8uire" people to li%e in 3C one year 'efore 8ualifying for

welfare 'enets2. Court(nconstitutional

a. Uses strict scrtin$ %ec#se rig(t to tr#vel is)n!#ment#l *implie! t(rog( or )e!er#l nion #n!person#l li%ert$ concepts+

i. Resi!enc$ re"irements )or %ene?ts nconsttion#lb. "iIerence is 'etween people w$o $a%e an" w$o $a%ent

tra%ele"i. /$e law treats t$e! "iIerently an" t$is is t$e %iolation of

e8ual protectionc. 7%en if goo" reason =state "oesnt want 'ur"en>, not narrowly

tailore">iii. Saen* % Joe =1KKK>

1. acts CA welfare progra! li!ite" new resi"ents to t$e 'enets t$ey

woul" $a%e recei%e" in t$e state of t$eir prior resi"ence

2. Court

(nconstitutionala. Cort reconcept#lies t(e rig(t to tr#vel loo&s #t t(eprivileges #n! immnities cl#se'Ec

i. Cant get to t$e resolution t$ey want to get wit$ t$eirfun"a!ental interest approac$ 'ecause t$eres not a realpenalty

b. PH clause $as less scrutiny 'ut its still enoug$ to stri+e "own toput "own t$ese su'tle "iIerences

c. /$ree co!ponents of rig$t to tra%eli. Jig$t to interstate tra%elii. Jig$t to 'e treate" as a welco!e %isitoriii. or t$ose w$o 'eco!e per!anent citi*ens t$e rig$t to 'e

treate" li+e any ot$er citi*en of t$e statee. Welfare

i. Generally1. NOT # )n!#ment#l rig(t r#tion#l %#sis revie' ONL2

2. W$y 9G4/ welfare 'e fun"a!ental6a. Dou nee" a 'asic 'aseline in or"er to participate in politics, $a%e

access to t$e court syste!b. Close ne&us to t$e en)oy!ent of ot$er rig$ts

ii. 3an"ri"ge % Willia!s =1KF0>1. acts pro%ision of 93s welfare progra! t$at grante" !ost eligi'le

fa!ilies t$eir co!pute" ;stan"ar" of nee"< 'ut i!pose" a !a&!ont$ly grant of X20 per fa!ily regar"less of si*e

2. CourtConstitutionala. Welfare is not a fun"a!ental interestb. oun" rational state interestc. Court wants to a%oi" pro%i"ing strict scrutiny 'ecause t$en law

woul" 'e presu!pti%ely in%ali"i. t woul" 'e i!possi'le to run a welfare progra! wit$out

"rawing so!e "istinctions an" SS woul" pose so!e"i:culty

1. Want to a%oi" state cutting progra! entirely

). 7"ucation


22/34

i. San Antonio n"ep Sc$ool 3ist % Jo"rigue* =1KF.> #o rig$t to pu'lice"ucation

1. acts /e&as use" nancing syste! 'ase" on property ta&es t$at

ga%e so!e stu"ents in t$e "istrict !ore !oney per pupil t$an ot$ers2. CourtConstitutional =rational 'asis re%iew>

a. No )n!#ment#l rig(t to p%lic e!c#tion in t(econstittion

i. #ot really a 'asis in t$e past =)u"icial restraint>b. 7PC "oes not re8uire perfect e8uality in sc$ooling

ii. Plyler % 3oe =1K@2> (n"ocu!ente" c$il"ren $a%e a rig$t to free pu'lice"ucation

1. acts /e&as statute aut$ori*e" local sc$ool "istricts to "eny free

pu'lic e"ucation to un"ocu!ente" c$il"ren 9ust pay tuition fees2. Court(nconstitutional =inter!e"iate scrutiny>

a. Hig(er level o) scrtin$ %ec#se concern )or n!occ(il!ren '(o #re (ere t(rog( no )#lt o) t(eir o'n

i. ts a oneti!e e%ent 4ere, t$e states actions were sounpalata'le t$at Court was unwilling to a"$ere to itsprece"ent

b. Co!'ines pree!pti%e analysis fe"eral go%t to !a+e t$ese

"ecisionsc. 3oes not o%errule Jo"rigue*

III. ,III. ,ODERNODERNSSUSTANTIVEUSTANTIVEDDUEUE44ROCESSROCESS

A.Pri%acy an" Procreation

a Originsi. Loc$ner so!eti!es people $a%e li'erty interests in conQict wit$ legislation

ii. 9eyers =1K2.> in%ali"ate" state law pro$i'iting t$e teac$ing of any

!o"ern language ot$er t$an 7nglis$ in any pu'lic or pri%ate gra!!ar sc$ool

' Waters$e" Casesi. Griswol" % C/ =1K> t$ere is a fun"a!ental rig$t to pri%acy

1. acts#. Griswol" is 7&ec 3irector of Planne" Parent$oo" an" 3r Bu&ter

is p$ysician Gi%e a"%ice on contraception to !arrie" persons%. (n"er Conn law it is a cri!e for anyone to use anyt$ing to

pre%ent contraception /$ey are c$ange" wit$ accessories to%iolators of t$is law =!arrie" couple>

. Court(nconstitutional

#. Viol#te! #n n0enmer#te! rig(t to priv#c$i. Sorce@ 4enm%r# o) cert#in %ill o) rig(ts

provisions%. Court see!s to say t$at state cannot regulate use of

contracepti%e 'ut can regulate t$e a'ility to possess it an"!anufacturing of it

ii. Joe % Wa"e =1KF.> fun"a!ental rig$t to an a'ortion

1. acts#. /Y statute !a"e procuring an a'ortion a cri!e e&cept for sa%ing

!o!s life. Court(nconstitutional


23/34

#. E/ten!s Gris'ol! rig(t to priv#c$ into #%ortion conte/t.#l#nces #g#inst govt:s interest in regl#ting in t(e #re#.ec#se )n!#ment#l interest< #ppl$ strict scrtin$.

%. Also respect for wo!ens autono!yc. Joe says t$at t$e rst tri!ester t$eres no co!pelling interest to

regulate a'ortioni. But 'eyon" t$e 1st tri!ester you can regulate a'ortion

!. Cort !r#'s t(e line #t vi#%ilit$ # %it mr&$ *not%iologic#ll$ ?/e!+

e. states re8uire" to per!it a'ortions if t$e life of t$e !ot$er ist$reatene"

i. even i) t(e interest in post0vi#%le )et#l li)e iscompelling< t(is interest !oes not ot'eig( t(einterest o) # 'om#n controlling (er %o!$ to protect(er (e#lt(

1. Balancing act 'etween life of !ot$er an" life offetus

c A'ortion un"ingi. 9a$er % Joe =1KFF>

1. acts

#. state regulation "enie" !e"icai" 'enets for nont$erapuetica'ortion 'ut ga%e it for c$il"'irt$. CourtConstitutional

#. Government (#s no #Brm#tive constittion#l o%lig#tionto ensre t(#t #ll 'omen (#ve t(e ?n#nci#l resorces to(#ve #n #%ortion

i. Courts assu!ption is t$e sa!e positi%eEnegati%e rig$ts1. We "ont want t$e go%ern!ent i!posing positi%e

rig$ts to t$e states%. 4ol"ing5 in"igent wo!en $a%e a constitutional rig$t to a'ortion

'ut t$ere is no constitutional rig$t for t$e state to fun" t$eseproce"ures

ii. 4arris % 9cJae =1K@0>1. acts#. Law pro$i'iting use of !e"icai" fun"s ;to perfor! a'ortions

e&cept w$ere t$e life of t$e !ot$er woul" 'e en"angere" orrapeEincest

1. acts

#. State statute $a" t$e following re8uire!entsi. 2n" tri!ester a'ortions 'e perfor!e" in a $ospitalii. Before consenting to a'ortions, wo!en 'e ;orally

infor!e" 'y $er p$ysician of t$e status of $er pregnancy,t$e "e%elop!ent of $er fetus, possi'ility of %ia'ility, an"ot$er options

iii. Atten"ing p$ysician !ust infor! wo!an ;of particularris+s1. /$ey $a%e !ore li!ite" rig$ts on a'ortions. Court says c$il"ren are "iIerent fro! a"ults an" t$ey will 'enet fro!

consultation wit$ t$eir parents#. But t$e court says t$at wo!en s$oul"nt $a%e to tal+ to t$eir

$us'an"s 'ut "aug$ters $a%e to tal+ to t$eir parents9. #ot an un"ue 'ur"en for !inors to $a%e to spea+ wit$ t$eir parents

iii. C$ange of /ri!ester ra!ewor+ Political 7%ent1. WebsterCourt up$ol"s se%eral 9issouri statutes regulating a'ortion

Suggests Joe tri!ester fra!ewor+ s$oul" 'e a'an"on an" at o""s wit$states "eter!ination of %ia'ility

iv. PP of S7 Penn % Casey =1KK2>1. acts

#. Court as+e" to consi"er constitutionality of Penn laws regulatinga'ortion infor!e" consent, 2 $our waiting perio", parentalconsent to !inors, spousal consent for !arrie" wo!en

. Courtso!e constitutional, so!e unconstitutional n!e %r!en

st#n!#r!#. Re#Brms Roe UT reconcept#lies vi#%ilit$ *st#rts #tconception+

i. Re5ects trimester )r#me'or&%. 9a+es a'ortion !ore a'out autono!y an" 'o"ily integrity

i. f rig$ts are going to !ean anyt$ing, t$en we nee" toclearly articulate its 'oun"aries

c. Applying un"ue 'ur"eni. 2$our waiting perio"

1. #o, not any!ore ,verrule -ity o* A$ron, sayalt$oug$ t$ere is a 'ur"en, it is not an un"ue'ur"en nfor!e" "ecision !a+ing is t$e 'etter

ruleii. Spousal notication perio"

1. Court says t$is an un"ue 'ur"en

. /$is goes to pri%acy greater intrusion $a%ing totell t$e $us'an"

iii. Consent for !inors

1. #ot an un"ue 'ur"en


25/34

!. /est

i. Before %ia'ility a wo!an $as a rig$t to ter!inate $era'ortion

ii. A law "esigne" to furt$er t$e states interest in fetal%ia'ility t$at i!poses an un"ue 'ur"en on a'ortion 'efore%ia'ility is (C

iii. After %ia'ility a state !ay place any restriction inclu"ingproscri'ing a'ortion

e Partial Birt$ A'ortionsi. Sten'erg % Car$art =2000>

1. acts#. #e'ras+a statute 'anne" ;partial 'irt$ a'ortion< =3H7 an" 3HY>

"ene" asi. An a'ortion proce"ure in w$ic$ t$e person perfor!ing t$e

a'ortion partially "eli%ers %aginally a li%ing un'orn c$il"'efore +illing t$e un'orn c$il" an" co!pleting t$e "eli%ery

. CourtUnconstittion#l per strict scrtin$

#. =#ils to m#&e #n e/ception )or t(e (e#lt( o) t(e mot(eri. State cannot en"anger !ot$er 'y forcing $er to un"ergo

ris+ier proce"ureii. Only per!its e&ception if lifet$reatening not ot$er$ealt$ ris+s

1. ,ot(er:s #tonom$ still trmps%. (n"ue 'ur"en

ii. Gon*ale* % Car$art =200F>1. acts

#. A'out a fe"eral act w$ic$ contains a !oral clai!, focuses onli%ing fetuses =not su'stantial pieces of an un'orn c$il">, usesanato!ical "iIerences Je8uire!ent of an ;o%ert act< a+a +illingt$e fetus after presentation

i. Cri!inali*es O#LD w$en a'ortion "one to facilitate +illing

%ersus co!plete "eli%eryii. S/LL no e&ception for t$e $ealt$ of t$e !ot$er. CourtConstitutional

#. '(en t(e )ets is plle! ot t(en it constittes # li)e in'(ic( t(e st#te (#s #n interest cort mst %econcerne! 'it( gresomeness

%. W$y no un"ue 'ur"en6i. Court says t$eres alternati%es 3H7 an" 3H7 wE feta

"e!ise1. But w$at a'out t$e rig$t of a wo!en to c$oose a

safer option6a Court says t$eres an e%i"entiary conQict

so!e e%i"ence on 'ot$ si"es =!ore ris+y %less ris+y>

9. #ote Blow to t$e proc$oice !o%e!ent

.a!ily an" Ot$er ;Pri%acy< nterestsa a!ily is a un"a!ental Jig$t

i. 9oore % City of 7ast Cle%elan" =1KFF>1. acts

#. Or"inance w$ic$ purports to li!it occupants of t$e sa!e"welling to !e!'ers of t$e sa!e fa!ily only inclu"e" a fewcategories of in"i%i"uals =e&ten"e" fa!ily are not inclu"e">


26/34

. Court(nconstitutional per "ue process clause

#. Viol#te! )n!#ment#l rig(t *t(s strict scrint$+ to !e?neone:s o'n )#mili#l #rr#ngements

i. S#nctit$ o) )#mil$ even non0ncle#rii. Deepl$ roote! in or tr#!ition #n! t(is merits more

constittion#l protection%. Barring unrelate" people fro! li%ing wit$ eac$ ot$er is rationally

relate" =rational 'asis>

' 9arriage is a un"a!ental Jig$t =un"er 78ual Protection Clause>i. Zaloc+i % Je"$ail =1KF@>1. acts

#. W statute says !arriage applicants w$o alrea"y $a%e a c$il"an" !ust support %ia c$il" support !ay not !arry wit$out prior

)u"icial "eter!ination t$at t$e support $as 'een !et an"c$il"ren wont 'eco!e pu'lic c$arges

. Court(nconstitutional per t$e e"#l protection cl#se *not s%.

!e process+#. T(ere is # )n!#ment#l rig(t to m#rr$%. /$is is not a reasona'le regulation, interferes wit$ "ecision

!a+ing

c. Broa" infringe!ent on t$e rig$t to !arry!. Pro'a'ly "eci"e" on e8ual protection clause 'ecause if on su'"ue process woul" $a%e re%iewe" too !uc$ legislation on strictscrutiny

i. 9ig$t open up gay !arriageii. 9arriage penalties wit$ ta&es

c Se&ual Orientation nterestsi. Bowers % 4ar"wic+ =1K@> OVERTURNED 2 LARENCE

1. acts#. A"ult !ale was cri!inally c$arge" for %iolating Georgias

so"o!y statute 'y co!!itting a se&ual act wit$ anot$er a"ult!ale in $is own 'e"roo!

%. Statute "ene" so"o!y as co!!itting or su'!itting ;anyse&ual act in%ol%ing t$e se& organs of one person an" t$e !out$or anus of anot$er

an" not courts61. Cant always "epen" on t$e !a)ority to gi%e us

rig$tsa Argu!ent can run 'ot$ ways

iii. #ote on Sa!eSe& 9arriage1. Protecte" fa!ily is roote" in tra"ition. 9oreo%er states are allowe" to regulate so!e aspects of t$e fa!ily

#. 9eans t$ey will 'e a'le to regulate !arriage9. 3O9A ="enes !arriage for fe"eral purposes as unity 'etween

!anEwo!an>#. Allows states #O/ to recogni*e sa!ese& !arriage if t$ey "ont

want to%. 3enes !arriage for fe"eral purposes as t$e unity 'etween a

!an an" a wo!an;. n lig$t of Jo!er is 3O9A unconstitutional6

#. nteresting 8uestion argua'ly so[%. 3O9A allows states to "o w$at SCO/(S for'i"s in Jo!er an"

frowns up in Lawrence w$ic$ is singling out gays for "iIerenttreat!ent

c. But you coul" always argue it S constitution 'y saying itsreasona'le regulation

i. Jeal constitutional g$t $ere o%er gay !arriage. W$ats t$e 'est strategy for securing t$e rig$t to gay !arriage6

#. Ria fe"eral go%ern!ent or %ia t$e states to c$ange t$eirregulations6

i. 9ay'e start state 'y state to s$ow t$e fe"s t$ere issupport an" t$en go t$roug$ t$e fe"eral go%t

C./$e Jig$t to 3ie s&ippingMa Cru*an % 3ir, 9issouri 3ept of 4ealt$' Was$ington % Gluc+s'erg

IV. 4IV. 4ROCEDURALROCEDURALDDUEUE44ROCESSROCESS

A Li'erty an" Property nterestsa Generally

i W$at will trigger life, li'erty, property1 3epri%ation of statutory entitle!ent2 7nsure certain proce"ural safeguar"s

' Gol"'erg % ellyi welfare recipients interest in continue" receipt of pay!ents constitute" a

;property interest

i acts

1 security guar" $ire", sai" on $is application t$at $e ne%er $a" a felony t$ey foun" out $e $a" a larceny c$arge ire" for "is$onestly Clai!s$e s$oul" get a preter!ination $earing

ii Court (nconstitutional

1 O$io create" t$e original property interest 'Ec t$ey classie" $i! as aci%il ser%ant

a Sai" suc$ e!ployees can 'e ter!inate" only for cause an" !ayo'tain a"!inistrati%e re%iew

2 State cant constitutionally aut$ori*e t$e "epri%ation of an interestonce t$ey%e conferre" it wit$out appropriate proce"ural safeguar"s

f /own of Castle Joc+, CO % Gon*ale*i acts

1 ?u"ge grante" restraining or"er against $er c$il"rens fat$er2 C$il"ren ta+en fro! playgroun" an" s$e calle" police to enforce or"eran" go get $er +i"s =+now w$ere t$ey are>, an" police "i"nt i"s were+ille" Or"er tol" police to use any possi'le !eans to enforce or"er

ii Court no property rig$ts

1 s t$ere anyt$ing in Colora"o law t$at says t$at enforce!ent of t$e JOis !an"atory6

a #ot !uc$ in CO law t$at says t$at its !an"atory use of t$ewor" ;s$all

i Li!ite" resources for "isa'ility ser%ices progra!ii Loo+s to !ore utilitarian %aluesiii A""e" costs to progra! !ay "epri%e ot$ers of t$eir

'enets

V. SV. STATETATEAACTIONCTIONANDAND44ROLE,SROLE,SO=O=44RIVATERIVATE44OEROER

A State Action an" e"eralis!#. Gener#ll$

i Guarantees of Constitution run only against State1. Pro$i'itions apply only to state con"uct an" not to purely pri%ate

con"uctii Pri%ate "iscri!inators

1. #ot su')ect to constitution 'ut are su')ect to ci%il rig$ts statutesiii Court $as struggle" to "eter!ine state action %ersus truly pri%ate con"uct

1. or e&a!ple, w$en power is attri'uta'le to 'enets pro%i"e" 'ygo%ern!ent to pri%ate parties t$at aIect t$e li%es of people Li+e'roa"casters W$at is t$e con"uct encourage" 'y or aut$ori*e" 'ygo%t action6 (n"er t$ose circu!stances la'eling actions as pri%atecon"uct !ay see! inappropriate

i% /wo ru'rics for 4AJ3 CAS7S1. So!eti!es, t$e Court n"s t$at a pri%ate actor !ust 'e su')ect to

constitutional re8uire!ents 'ecause t$e state $as "elegate" atra"itional state or pu'lic function to a pri%ate entity

. So!eti!es t$e court n"s t$at a pri%ate actor !ust 'e su')ect toconstitutional re8uire!ents 'ecause

#. /$e state $as appro%e", encourage", or facilitate" pri%ate

con"uct%. /$e state $as 'eco!e entangle" wit$ a pri%ate entity% 7ASD CAS7S #O S/A/7 AC/O#

1. W$en t$e state itself $as acte" or w$en t$ere is t$oug$t to 'e no stateaction of any +in"

. #o state action !eans only t$at t$e Constitution "oesnt of its ownforce regulate t$e acti%ity

%. Constittion< Amen!. 1;< 1< i Section 1.All persons 'orn or naturali*e" in t$e (nite" States, an" su')ect

to t$e )uris"iction t$ereof, are citi*ens of t$e (nite" States an" of t$e Statew$erein t$ey resi"e #o State s$all !a+e or enforce any law w$ic$ s$alla'ri"ge t$e pri%ileges or i!!unities of citi*ens of t$e (nite" States- nor s$all

any State "epri%e any person of life, li'erty, or property, wit$out "ue processof law- nor "eny to any person wit$in its )uris"iction t$e e8ual protection oft$e laws

ii Section ./$e Congress s$all $a%e power to enforce, 'y appropriatelegislation, t$e pro%isions of t$is article

c. T(e Civil Rig(ts C#sesi Bans "iscri!ination in places of a!use!ent an" pu'lic con%eyancesii Pri%ate encroac$!ent on t$ese rig$ts is not protecte" againstiii Concern of fe"eralis!i% 9ay stan" for t$e proposition t$at states are t$e pri!ary guarantors of t$e

rig$ts of t$eir citi*ens, an" t$at t$e fe" go%t !ay protect t$ose rig$ts if 'ut only if t$e states fail to "o so


30/34

B Pure naction#. 3es$aney % Winne'ago County 3ept of Social Ser%ices =1K@K>

i acts1. C$il" se%erely 'eaten 'y fat$er after state ga%e custo"y an" e%en after

state inspectors went to c$ec+ on t$e c$il"ii Court state not lia'le

1. Pure inaction "oes #O/ e8ual state action

#. Dou nee" SO97 action 'ut $ow !uc$ "o you nee"6%. lagg Bros % Broo+s =1KF@>i acts

1. wo!an gets e%icte", t$ings put in storage s$e gets a 'ill. s$e gets angry, "oesnt want to pay, an" sues9. #D law allows for t$e sale of possessions to satisfy t$e lien if t$e

person $as 'een notie"ii Court state not lia'le

1. All #D $as "one is ac8uiesce to t$e salec. Lugar % 7"!onson Oil Co!pany =1K@2>

i acts1. Lugar was in"e'te" to t$e oil co!pany

. Co!pany attac$e" property to t$e "e't lower court allowe" t$is9. Writ of attac$!ent was later "is!isse" 'ecause )ustications were

insu:cient;. Lugar sues in fe"eral court clai!ing cre"itor an" state )ointly acte" to

"epri%e $i! of $is property in t$e "ue process clauseii Court state was lia'le

1. T'o p#rt #ppro#c(#. Depriv#tion mst %e c#se! %$ t(e e/ercise o) some

rig(t or privilege cre#te! %$ t(e St#te or %$ # rle o)con!ct impose! %$ t(e St#te or %$ # person '(om t(eSt#te is responsi%le

%. 4#rt$ c(#rge! 'it( t(e !epriv#tion mst %e )#irl$

c(#rge! to %e # st#te #ctori. ,#$ %e st#te oBci#l %-c (e (#s #cte! toget(er 'it(

or (#s o%t#ine! signi?c#nt #i! )rom st#te oBci#lsi acts

1. Blac+ !an "enie" ser%ice in a coIee s$op on a par+ing lot t$at t$estate owns

ii Court1. T(e )#cts (ere sggest s$m%iosis mt#ll$ %ene?ci#l

rel#tions(ip#. "ea $ere is t$at t$e state is in ca$oots wit$ t$e pri%ate actor

i. State got t$e !oney fro! t$e $ig$est 'i""er1 State gets !oney2 CoIee s$op gets custo!ers an" a pri!e location,

20 year lease%. /$is S a !utually 'enecial relations$ip so we s$oul" treat

t$e! as a state actori. W$y isnt t$e go%ern!ent a coparticipant in all

organi*ations, entities, sole proprietors$ips t$at payta&es6

. W$en it co!es to su'si"i*es $ow !uc$ is nee"e" to create stateaction6

#. W$at a'out sc$ool lunc$es in pri%ate sc$ools6 per$aps

%. W$at a'out ta&e&e!pt status for nonprots6 per$aps

%. Jen"ellBa+er % o$n =1K@2>i acts

1. Petitioners are e!ployees of t$e #ew Perspecti%e Sc$ool, w$ic$ ispri%ately owne" speciali*ing in trou'le" stu"ents, !ost stu"entsreferre" to it fro! pu'lic sc$ools K0T fun"e" 'y t$e state

. After %oicing "isagree!ents at t$e sc$ool, t$e e!ployees were re"an" sue" re5 1st a!en"!ent an" 3P

ii Court state not lia'le

1. Cort !istingis(es )rom urton%ec#se t(e sit#tion is moreli&e contr#cting< #n! less li&e s$m%iosis

#. /$e sc$ool is "oing an optional ser%ice, it is not !an"ate" 'y

t$e state. Burger says state "oesnt 'enet fro! t$e sc$ool 'ut is t$at reallytrue6 9ost of t$e sc$ools population consists of trou'le" +i"s "rawnfro! pu'lic sc$ool syste! s t$at a 'enet to t$e state6

#. Des t$e state 'enets 'Ec pro'le! +i"s are still getting e"ucate"an" now pu'lic sc$ool syste! can run !ore eIecti%ely

%. Benet to sc$ool is a'le to run 'usiness fro! state fun"ingc. Burger analogi*es to ot$er pri%ate corporations w$ose 'usiness

"epen"s on go%ern!ent contracts ts pri%ati*e" go%ern!entacti%ity

9. 4ow is t$is "istinguis$e" fro! Burton6#. 9an"atory %ersus optional6

i. E!c#tion is not # )n!#ment#l rig(tc. San ran Arts H At$letics, nc % (S Oly!pic Co!!ittee =1K@F>i acts

1. e&clusi%e rig$t to use t$e ter! ;Oly!pics< an" so!eone starts ;t$egay Oly!pics


32/34

9. 3iIerence 'tw Shelley an" San @rancisco, $ere state is not actuallyencouraging con"uct

7 State Licensing an" Aut$ori*ation#. Pu'lic (tilities Co!! % Polla+ =1K2>

i acts1. C$arters capital area transit for 'us an" streetcar ser%ice t

e&peri!ents wit$ a ;!usic as you ri"e< progra!, passengers o')ect,

sue 3Cii Court #ot clear

1. W$at "o you nee" to ren"er t$e licensee a state actor6#. Dou nee" so!et$ing 'eyon" licensing

i. I!e# is t(#t t(is goes %e$on! netr#lit$ #n! isencor#ging t(e !epriv#tion o) li%ert$

%. 9oose Lo"ge #o 10F % r%is =1KF2>i acts

1. Pri%ate clu' on pri%ate property "enie" ser%ing 'lac+ !an in 'ar ssueis o%er li8uor license

ii Court state not lia'le E no state action

1. Ev#l#ting s$m%iosis

#. 4ow "oes t$e Lo"ge 'enet6i. Lo"ge gets !ore !e!'ers$ips increase re%enues

%. W$ere is t$e state 'enet6i. State can regulate li8uor "istri'ution, gets pai" for t$e

li8uor license =%ery e&pensi%e[>. 74enn Li"or Control %o#r! pl#$e! #%soltel$ no p#rt in

est#%lis(ing or en)orcing t(e mem%ers(ip or gest policies o)t(e cl% t(#t it licenses to serve li"or8

#. State not a partner or e%en a )oint %enturer in t$e clu'c. ?ac+son % 9etropolitan 7"ison Co =1KF>

i acts1. Pri%ate electrical utility operating un"er state grante" !onopoly =li+e

Pollac+> ?ac+son was a custo!er w$o faile" to pay utility 'ill so9etropolitan 7"ison ter!inate" ser%ice Clai!s 7"ison state action t$at"epri%e" $er of property in %iolation of 3P

ii Court #o state action

1. 3istinguis$es fro! Pollac+ 'y saying $ow t$ere t$ey $a" nonneutralaction 'y i!ple!enting in%estigation an" ter!inating it An" $eret$ere is not$ing nonneutral

#. But, coul"nt you argue t$at passi%ity is en"orse!ent6 #ot ascrystal clear as Court suggests

. Regl#tion #lone< no m#tter (o' close #n! e/tensive< is notgoing to ren!er t(e regl#te! entit$ # st#te #ction

/$e Pu'lic unction 3octrine#. 9ars$ % Ala'a!a

i acts1. Co!pany town, C$ic+asaw, pri%ately owne" 'y s$ipping co!pany, 'ut

ot$er t$an t$at loo+s li+e su'ur'an town. /own $a" no solicitation signs in stores an" appellant wante" to solicit

!aterials an" s$e was arreste" for %iolating state statute un"ercri!inal trespass

ii Court1. in"s for 9ars$ an" t$at application of cri!inal trespass statute

%iolates Constitution


33/34

#. Owners$ip "oes not always !ean a'solute "o!inioni. T(is to'n )nctions 5st li&e ever$ ot(er

mnicip#lit$ so $o c#nnot go #ron! crt#iling)ree!om o) resi!ents or visitors in t(e to'n.

1. 4er)orming # p%lic )nction. 4ere t$e court is caring a'out t$e eIect

#. An eIects test re8uires a:r!ati%e go%ern!ent inter%entioni. But courts often loo+s to !oti%esii. ConQict wit$ Washington v. Davisiii. Only concentrates on 'a" eIects not intent

9. Court states t$at )ree!om o) speec( #n! press #re more integr#lt(#n propert$ rig(ts=in"icate" in Constitution>

;. (ses pri%ateEpu'lic "istinction%. ?ac+son % 9etropolitan 7"ison Co

i acts1. Pri%ate electrical utility operating un"er state grante" !onopoly =li+e

Pollac+> ?ac+son was a custo!er w$o faile" to pay utility 'ill so9etropolitan 7"ison ter!inate" ser%ice Clai!s 7"ison state action t$at"epri%e" $er of property in %iolation of 3P

ii Court #o state action

1. 4ow woul" it co!e out un"er t'o prong ,#rs( test=a'o%e>6#. W$et$er e&ercising state li+e power6

i. 9onopoly o%er pu'lic electricity yes, e&ercises largepower 'ecause electric !o"ern necessity of life7&ercises power o%er in"i%i"uals t$at ri%als t$e sa!e

%. 3oes t$e i!position of Const constraints upon t$e electricco!pany seriously t$reaten t$e personal autono!y of co!pany6

i. #ot really 4ar" to see $ow state control seriouslyt$reatens personal autono!y " State re8uire" 3P$earings 'efore ter!inations of custo!er ser%ices see!sne an" coul" i!pose wit$out "i:culty

. One coul" conclu"e state inter%ention coul" 'e )ustie"

#. But Court "oesnt apply twoprong test

G (nconstitutional Con"itions H Bur"enEBenet 3istinction#. ntro"uction

i 'eneat$ t$e state action analysis t$ere are 'aseline e&pectationsii unconstitutional con"itions pro'le! arises w$en t$ere are strings to

go%ern!ent 'enets1. e&a!ple if t$e $ospital were to get fun"ing, t$ey !ust not perfor!

a'ortionsiii not e%ery ;string< is going to 'e unconstitutionali% 8uestion $ow s$oul" t$e court approac$ t$ese strings an" "eter!ine w$ic$

are unconstitutional6

% t$e new in8uiry $as a relations$ip to t$e state action "octrine1. n t$at it as+s $as t$e state acte" nonneutrally in so!e way6

#. Co!pare wit$ t$e 'aseline set of circu!stances t$at allows fort$e 'enet

%i +ey 8uestion w$at is t$e correct 'aseline so we can "eter!ineconstitutionality

%. Just % Sulli%an =1KK1>i acts

1. statute fe"eral fun"s for fa!ily ser%ices s$oul" not 'e use" w$erea'ortion is a !et$o" of fa!ily planning


34/34

. a"!in interpretation fe"eral fun"s coul" not 'e use" for a'ortion orany acti%ities t$at encourageEpro!oteEa"%ocate a'ortion

ii Court con"ition was constitutional

1. Go%ern!ent CA# select so!e acti%ities to fun" an" not ot$ers. #ot li!iting free speec$ )ust saying you cant use fe"eral !oney9. BAS7L#7 political econo!y of speec$

c. 9a$er % Joe =1KFF>i acts

1. state regulation granting 9e"icai" 'enets for c$il"'irt$, 'ut "enyingsuc$ 'enets for nont$erapeutic a'ortions


1. BAS7L#7 "eter!ine" 'y t$e allocation of wealt$ t$roug$ our pri%ateproperty syste!

. Po%erty is an o'stacle on t$e pat$ to a'ortion not a state action!. S3 % 3oe =1K@F>

i acts1. fe"eral statute "irecting t$e secretary of transportation to wit$$ol" a

portion of fe"eral $ig$way fun"s fro! states t$at "ont pro$i'it it t$epurc$ase of alco$ol 'y people un"er t$e age of 21


1. BAS7L#7 reser%e power of t$e statee. #ollan % CA Coastal Co!! =1K@F>i acts

1. con"itione" a 'uil"ing per!it on an ease!ent against t$eir 'eac$property

ii Court unconstitutional con"ition

1. BAS7L#7 t$e un"erlying law of property w$ere you $a%e t$e rig$t to'uil" on your property

. t$e co!!issions action are at least suspicious 'ecause it see!s tointerfere wit$ t$e rig$t to own property

9. co!!ission was engage" in nonneutral 'e$a%ior

Constitutional Law II - Bracey - Spring 2010

Documents

Transcript of Constitutional Law II - Bracey - Spring 2010