Download Constitutional Law and Civil Procedure Exam Review and more Exams Law in PDF only on Docsity!
SPEA-V 184: Exam 2 End of Year
Examination with 100% Correct
Answers.
Right to Privacy - ✔✔Not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but has been inferred by the courts, as seen in Griswold v. Connecticut. Natural Rights - ✔✔Inherent and unalienable rights that individuals possess Social Contract Theory - ✔✔Explores the relationship between government and individuals, including the protection of rights Content Neutral - ✔✔Free speech doctrine that allows certain types of regulation of speech, as long as the restriction does not favor one side In Rem Jurisdiction - ✔✔Jurisdiction based on claims against property, the property is the defendant Procedural Law - ✔✔Laws that define the methods for enforcing legal rights and duties Substantive Law - ✔✔Rights and duties that each person has in everyday conduct
Petition for Removal - ✔✔Filed by a defendant to transfer a case from state court to federal court, asserting that the federal court has jurisdiction and is the appropriate venue. Injunctions - ✔✔Court orders that require a party to do or refrain from doing a specific action Temporary Restraining Order - ✔✔An order from the court prohibiting a person from starting or continuing an action Personal vs. Subject Matter Jurisdiction - ✔✔The court's authority over specific individuals or entities involved in a case vs. The court's authority to handle a particular type of legal dispute. Long-Arm Statutes - ✔✔Enable a court to assert personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants based on their contacts or actions within the state Motion to Remand - ✔✔Request to return a case from federal to state court, typically filed by the plaintiff, arguing that the federal court lacks jurisdiction or that the case should not be in federal court. Preliminary Injunction - ✔✔An order issued before/during a lawsuit prohibiting a party from doing something during the course of the lawsuit
Rational Basis - ✔✔State Interest: Legitamite, Law's relation to State: Rationally Related, Who Has The Burden: Plaintiff Strict Scrutiny - ✔✔State Interest: Compelling, Law's relation to State: necessary to achieve the purpose and be narrowly tailored, Who Has The Burden, State Suspect Classes - ✔✔Has to do with a specific group of people that have previously been discriminated against (religion, ethnicity, etc.) Quasi Suspect - ✔✔Has to do with legitimacy of the law and gender O'Brien - ✔✔"Speech" and "Non-Speech" Elements Governmental interest in regulating the non-speech element can justify limitations of the First Amendment.
- Must be within the constitutional power of the government to enact
- Further an important or substantial government interest
- Interest must be unrelated to the suppression of speech
- Prohibit no more speech than is essential to further that interest
Brandenburg / Imminent Lawlessness - ✔✔The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is...
- Directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action
- Is likely to incite or produce such action 401 Test for Relevant Evidence - ✔✔- It has a tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evident
- The fact is of consequence in determining the action Mathew's Eldridge Balancing Test - ✔✔For lower courts to apply when determining whether or not an individual has received due process during administrative hearings
- Individual Interest
- Risk of Erroneous Deprivation
- Governmental Interest Time, Place, Manner Restrictions - ✔✔- Be content neutral
- Be narrowly tailored
- Serve a significant governmental interest
- Leave open ample alternative channels for communication
Mathews v. Eldridge - ✔✔Individuals have a statutorily granted property right in Social Security benefits Reilly v. Daly - ✔✔Denying request for preliminary injunction against Defendants-Appellees Indiana Dred Scott - ✔✔Ruled that African Americans, whether they are enslaved or free, could not be a US citizen US v. Carolene Products - ✔✔Milk with additives banned from interstate shipment, upheld federal policy, sets ground work for the assumption of constitutionality in economic regulation in stones footnote Brown v. Board - ✔✔Led to the desegregation of American schools Loving v. Virginia - ✔✔Ended laws prohibiting interracial marriage Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center - ✔✔Applied for a permit to house the mentally ill, denied by the city council. The Supreme Court declared that the denial of this permit was a prejudice, and thus was unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.
Griswold v. Connecticut - ✔✔Married couple wanted to get contraceptives; struck down a Connecticut law prohibiting the sale of contraceptives; established the right of privacy through the 4th and 9th amendment Brandenburg v. Ohio - ✔✔Threats of a KKK leader were deemed ok b/c of a failure to prove a real danger from them. Declared that speech is protected unless proven that actions directly incited the action Schenck v. United States - ✔✔Justice Holmes declared that government can limit speech if the speech provokes a "clear and present danger" of substantive evils. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - ✔✔"Fighting words" are not protected by the First Amendment United States v. O'Brien - ✔✔Draft card burning did not violate the First Amendment's guarantee of Free Speech New York Times v. Sullivan - ✔✔Freedom of Speech protections limit the ability of American public officials to sue for defamation Texas v. Johnson - ✔✔Flag burning, protection of the First Amendment
