Download Law 404 Final Exam
Law 404 Final Exam Questions & Answers 2023/2024 and more Exams Health sciences in PDF only on Docsity!
Law 404 Final Exam Questions &
Answers 2023/
IRAC is a method of analysis whereby: - Correct answer A legal problem can be identified and resolved. What are the three big questions of institutional choice in American constitutional law? - Correct answer Federalism, separation of powers, and individual rights What is NOT a standard type of legal argument used in hard constitutional cases? - Correct answer Arguments based on political partisanship The central question in EVERY constitutional case is ... - Correct answer which institution should be understood to possess decision-making authority over the subject at hand. By broad consensus, the greatest weakness of the federal government is ... - Correct answer its remoteness from the people and consequent susceptibility to tyranny of the minority. (DOUBLE CHECK) Which of the following statements best explains the differences in the Steel Cases between the writings of Justices Black and Jackson? Black would have reversed the lower court decision, but Jackson agreed with it. Jackson was less concerned about whether Congress impliedly or expressly authorized the President's actions Black focused on answering the legal question whereas Jackson provided a conceptual framework to analyze such issues. - Correct answer c.) Black focused on answering the legal question whereas Jackson provided a conceptual framework to analyze such issues.
Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Stevens all agreed on the following in Whitman v. Amer. Trucking Asssn.: Whitman directed the EPA to write very strict ambient air quality standards. The EPA did not violate the anti-delegation doctrine. The American Trucking Association persuasively argued that there is no support for EPA authority in constitutional text or precedent. The "intelligible principle", which was created in 1928, should be re-considered because so much as changed in the last 100 years. - Correct answer b.) The EPA did not violate the anti-delegation doctrine. What is a good institutional argument supporting presidential removal power?
- Presidents are more likely to know administrative officials than members of Congress.
- Administrative officials are more likely to have technical expertise than the president.
- The president was elected by a majority of the voters. - Correct answer C. The president was elected by a majority of the voters. In US v. Texas, SCOTUS affirmed the states' victories in the lower courts because:
- Justice Scalia had died before the oral argument, but the court knew he was opposed to the DAPA policy.
- The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals correctly determined the Take Care clause could not be stretched to include DAPA.
- The justices could not agree whether DAPA did or did not violate the constitution. - Correct answer C.) The justices could not agree whether DAPA did or did not violate the constitution.
Show that the classification in the law bears some relation to a legitimate governmental objective. Ensure that persons of color are not subjected to unnecessary discrimination. None of the above - Correct answer b.) Show that the classification in the law bears some relation to a legitimate governmental objective. In US v Carolene Products, SCOTUS included a footnote that foreshadowed the following: Ned Stark would return as a white walker. The rational basis test might be insufficient for some kinds of discrimination. Substituting vegetable products in milk could require FDA review. WWII internment camps did not violate the constitution. - Correct answer b.) The rational basis test might be insufficient for some kinds of discrimination. Legal restrictions on the rights of racial groups are... - Correct answer Are inherently suspect US citizens may be interned in camps: - Correct answer When national security demands are deemed urgent Brown v Board of Education had the following effects: (Pick two:) It ended the practice of 'separate but equal' in any context. It prohibited school segregation based on race regardless of whether schools had equal funding. It re-introduced 'original meaning' interpretation in the context of the 14th Amendment. It recognized the psychological impact of racial segregation - Correct answer b.) It prohibited school segregation based on race regardless of whether schools had equal funding.
and It recognized the psychological impact of racial segregation A plaintiff seeking to prevail on an Equal Protection claim should argue the following test applies: Great deference test Rational basis test Strict scrutiny test Intermediate scrutiny test - Correct answer c.) Strict scrutiny test Under intermediate and strict scrutiny, the constitutional test involves which two components? High/significant governmental interest Congressional intent Discriminatory effect Means-end showing - Correct answer a.) High/significant governmental interest Scalia's dissent was based on which of the following legal arguments? VMI's Code of a Gentlemen is important and should not be easily discarded. Unelected federal judges should not be the final decision-makers of social mores. VMI's single-gender policy was a courageous decision by a single state that should be respected in a federal system. Until recently, the best military academies were male-only. - Correct answer b.) Unelected federal judges should not be the final decision-makers of social mores. Which of the following is not a suspect classification?
Courts conduct a fact-intensive inquiry, weighing the likely benefits to the majority against the likely harm to minorities. Courts ask the parties to procure surveys canvassing public responses to a congressional spending measure. Courts don't need to determine whether congressional spending is consistent with the general welfare because nothing in the text of the Constitution suggests that the "general welfare" is a relevant consideration. - Correct answer Courts defer substantially to the judgment of Congress. What serious question did the Jones & Laughlin dissenters raise?
- Was there any role left for the Executive? Does Congress have any power at all?
- Is there any human activity beyond federal regulatory power?
- Why should the Supreme Court determine what is commerce? - Correct answer Is there any human activity beyond federal regulatory power? Debates over the spending power closely track the - divide
- state-political process
- federal-state
- Madison-Jefferson
- Hamilton-Jefferson - Correct answer Hamilton-Jefferson What rule does NFIB add to the commerce power rules established by J&L?
- Congress may regulate commercial activity at the production level.
- Congress may not regulate commercial activity at the production level. The commerce power does not permit Congress to regulate inactivity. The commerce power permits Congress to regulate inactivity. - Correct answer The commerce power does not permit Congress to regulate inactivity. The federal spending power is subject to how many limitations? - Correct answer 3 What is the key question in a 10th Amendment anti-commandeering principle case?
- Does Congress have the authority to legislate under its spending power?
- Are the executive, legislative, and judicial branches working in unison?
- Is Congress prohibiting state action, or requiring affirmative state action?
- Does Congress have the authority to legislate under its commerce power?
- Correct answer Is Congress prohibiting state action, or requiring affirmative state action? Under the anti-commandeering principle, Congress is prohibited from doing which of the following?
- Nothing.
- Prohibit the states from violating federal law.
Under the anti-commandeering principle, what does Congress remain free to do?
- Prohibit states from acting in violation of federal law.
- Require states to legislate or enforce federal laws.
- The anti-commandeering principle imposes no limits on Congress. - Correct answer Prohibit states from acting in violation of federal law. Lopez, Morrison, and NFIB make it essential to focus on what?
- The text of the Commerce Clause in Article I, Section 8, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution
- The Executive's historical interpretation of Congress's Commerce Clause power
- The Judiciary's historical interpretation of Congress's Commerce Clause power
- What precisely Congress is seeking to regulate. - Correct answer What precisely Congress is seeking to regulate. The removal power is...
- Central to the President's power to control the federal bureaucracy, and thus the President's Article II powers.
- Inadequate for the President to fulfill his or her duties under the Take Care clause.
- Not found in the Constitution, and thus it doesn't exist.
- Ripe for abuse and should be carefully regulated by Congress. - Correct answer Central to the President's power to control the federal bureaucracy, and thus the President's Article II powers. What rule do Lopez and Morrison collectively add to the commerce power rules established by J&L?
- Congress may not regulate commercial activity at the manufacturing level.
- Congress may not regulate commercial activity at the production level.
- The commerce power permits Congress to regulate noneconomic activities.
- The commerce power does not permit Congress to regulate noneconomic activities. - Correct answer The commerce power does not permit Congress to regulate noneconomic activities. Is the scope of modern congressional power to regulate economic activity very narrow or very broad? - Correct answer Very broad What is the first part of the rule announced in Jones & Laughlin?
- The rule announced in Gibbons no longer applies.
- Before enacting any commerce-regulating legislation, Congress must seek approval from the courts.
The Executive's exercise of that discretion must be contrary to, not consonant with, the congressional policy underlying the statutes. The Executive is free to disregard congressional policy when executing the laws. - Correct answer The Executive's exercise of that discretion must be consonant with, not contrary to, the congressional policy underlying the law. The removal power is... Central to the President's power to control the federal bureaucracy, and thus the President's Article II powers. Inadequate for the President to fulfill his or her duties under the Take Care clause. Not found in the Constitution, and thus it doesn't exist. Ripe for abuse and should be carefully regulated by Congress. - Correct answer Central to the President's power to control the federal bureaucracy, and thus the President's Article II powers. When is a plaintiff most likely to win on a claim that the President violated the Take Care clause? When the individual suffered harm from non-enforcement. When the President engaged in an EXTREME instance of non-enforcement.
When the President largely executed the law according to the law's precise wording, but expanded the law's coverage very slightly. When the President executed the law according to the law's precise wording, and did not expand it in any way. - Correct answer When the President engaged in an EXTREME instance of non-enforcement. What is the most fundamental question raised by the development of the modern administrative state? Whether this development is a good idea. Whether the development of the administrative state is constitutional. To what extent the courts should review the actions of the administrative state. The administrative state exists now as it always has, so no questions remain. - Correct answer Whether the development of the administrative state is constitutional. The Take Care clause imposes a(n) ----- duty and grants a(n) ----- power. (Fill in the blanks) implied; explicit affirmative; explicit non-delegable; de minimis explicit; implied - Correct answer explicit; implied
Varies in importance depending on who hold the presidency at any given time. A non-factor in modern government. An aberration with no positive effects. - Correct answer Absolutely central to modern government. What type of injury must a plaintiff allege to establish Article III standing? An injury with a low prognosis for recovery absent the court's intervention. A physical or psychological injury. A germane injury of significant duration. A concrete, particularized, and imminent injury. - Correct answer A concrete, particularized, and imminent injury. How does Article III standing relate to the question of institutional choice? Establishing standing is a necessary prerequisite to any suit. Standing criteria defines which decisions can be made by courts and which must be left to the political process. Plaintiffs who establish Article III standing get to choose whether Congress or the President should redress their grievances. Standing criteria allows courts to determine whether to leave the question to Congress or the President. - Correct answer Standing criteria defines which decisions can be made by courts and which must be left to the political process.
Which of the following best characterizes courts' review of executive decisions of non-enforcement? Courts typically invalidate such decisions. Courts review these decisions very deferentially. Courts review these decisions somewhat deferentially. They subject these decisions to a high level of judicial scrutiny. - Correct answer Courts review these decisions very deferentially. Aside from injury, what other two requirements must a plaintiff meet to establish Article III standing? High importance to vast numbers of society. Solvency and retention of counsel. Imminence and likelihood of recurrence. Causation and redressability. - Correct answer Causation and redressability. In effect, all real-world delegations of rulemaking authority are... Hard questions. Unconstitutional. Delegation of rulemaking authority is rare in the real-world.
The prohibition of the Equal Protection Clause goes no further than the invidious (i.e., unjust or malicious) discrimination. Rational basis review, the standard courts use, will invalidate the law. - Correct answer The prohibition of the Equal Protection Clause goes no further than the invidious (i.e., unjust or malicious) discrimination. What is the question of institutional choice in free speech cases?
- Whether the government has unconstitutionally restricted speech.
- Whether the federal courts or the political process is better suited to decide the permissibility of speech regulation.
- Whether local, elected officials or federal officials should be entrusted with striking the proper balance between an individual's right to free speech and the government's need to regulate.
- Whether the federal courts or the states can better protect freedom of speech. - Correct answer Whether the federal courts or the political process is better suited to decide the permissibility of speech regulation. What is the standard of "rational basis review"?
- Courts will defer to the political process unless a challenged classification has "no rational relation" to a legitimate governmental objective.
- Courts will require the government to have a very good reason for discriminating against minorities.
- Courts will not only require the government to have a very good reason for discriminating, but also that the regulation at issue is narrowly tailored. - Correct answer Courts will defer to the political process unless a challenged classification has "no rational relation" to a legitimate governmental objective. For how long has the Supreme Court vigorously protected freedom of speech?
- The Supreme Court does not currently protect freedom of speech any more vigorously than it has throughout history.
- Ever since the First Amendment's ratification in 1791.
- Only relatively recently.
- Ever since 1925, the year the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment restricts state and local governments, not just the federal government. - Correct answer Only relatively recently. What idea animates the Supreme Court's modern vigorous protection of freedom of speech?
- Dissenting political minorities require strong judicial protection.
- When ratified in 1791, freedom of speech enjoyed robust protection. The Court is simply trying to restore the expansive protection the First Amendment once enjoyed.
- The internet has fundamentally changed the landscape of free speech, and the Court is trying to keep up with technology.
