NextGen Bar Exam Constitutional Law Syllabus

Why is the legislative veto unconstitutional (INS v. Chadha)?

A legislative veto — Congress overturning executive action without passing a new law — violates the constitutional requirements of bicameralism (passage by both houses) and presentment (presentation to the President), which all exercises of legislative power must satisfy.

What is the nondelegation doctrine and the "intelligible principle" test?

Congress may delegate legislative authority to agencies so long as it provides an "intelligible principle" to guide the exercise of the delegated power. The doctrine is rarely enforced, though the "major questions doctrine" requires clear congressional authorization for agency actions of vast economic and political significance.

State the rule and analytical steps of the Supremacy Clause for express preemption.

Under the Supremacy Clause, federal law is supreme over conflicting state law. Express preemption occurs when a federal statute explicitly states that it displaces state law; courts then construe the scope of the preemption clause, typically narrowly given the presumption against preemption.

Distinguish the two forms of implied conflict preemption.

(1) Impossibility preemption — when compliance with both federal and state law is impossible. (2) Obstacle preemption — when state law stands as an obstacle to accomplishing the full purposes and objectives of Congress.

What is field preemption?

Field preemption occurs when the federal regulatory scheme is so pervasive, or the federal interest so dominant, that Congress is inferred to have intended to occupy the entire field and exclude all state regulation in that area (e.g., immigration, nuclear safety).

State the Dormant Commerce Clause rule for laws that discriminate against interstate commerce.

A state law that facially or purposefully discriminates against out-of-state commerce is virtually per se invalid; it survives only if the state proves it serves a legitimate local purpose that cannot be achieved by reasonable nondiscriminatory alternatives (strict scrutiny in practice).

What is the Pike balancing test for nondiscriminatory state laws under the Dormant Commerce Clause?

For a state law that is nondiscriminatory but burdens interstate commerce, the law is upheld unless the burden it imposes on interstate commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits (Pike v. Bruce Church).

What are the two exceptions to the Dormant Commerce Clause?

(1) The market-participant exception — a state acting as a buyer or seller (rather than a regulator) may favor its own citizens; and (2) congressional authorization — Congress may permit state laws that would otherwise violate the Dormant Commerce Clause.

What is the state action requirement, and why does it matter?

Most constitutional rights (especially under the Fourteenth Amendment) restrain only governmental action, not private conduct. A plaintiff must show the challenged conduct is fairly attributable to the government before constitutional protections apply.

What are the two main exceptions under which private conduct counts as state action?

(1) The public function exception — a private party performs a task traditionally and exclusively reserved to the state (e.g., running elections, a company town); and (2) the entanglement/joint participation exception — the state is significantly involved in, encourages, or facilitates the private conduct.

What process is "due" under procedural due process, and what is the balancing test?

Deprivation of life, liberty, or property requires fair process — typically notice and an opportunity to be heard. The amount of process is determined by the Mathews v. Eldridge balancing of (1) the private interest affected, (2) the risk of erroneous deprivation and value of additional safeguards, and (3) the government's interest, including fiscal and administrative burdens.

What triggers procedural due process protection — what counts as a protected "property" or "liberty" interest?

A property interest requires a legitimate claim of entitlement (created by an independent source like statute or contract), not a mere expectation. A liberty interest includes freedom from bodily restraint and fundamental rights, plus entitlements such as some government benefits and certain reputational-plus interests.

What is substantive due process, and what two tiers of review apply?

Substantive due process protects fundamental rights from government interference regardless of process. Laws burdening fundamental rights (e.g., privacy, marriage, travel, voting) get strict scrutiny — narrowly tailored to a compelling interest. Laws affecting non-fundamental interests get rational basis — rationally related to a legitimate interest.

List several rights recognized as "fundamental" under substantive due process.

Marriage; procreation; contraception; family relations and child-rearing; private consensual sexual intimacy; same-sex marriage (Obergefell); interstate travel; voting; and the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment. Note: there is no fundamental right to assisted suicide (Glucksberg).

State the three tiers of Equal Protection scrutiny and their triggers.

(1) Strict scrutiny — suspect classifications (race, national origin, alienage) and fundamental rights: must be narrowly tailored to a compelling interest. (2) Intermediate scrutiny — quasi-suspect classes (gender, illegitimacy): substantially related to an important interest. (3) Rational basis — all others (age, wealth, disability): rationally related to a legitimate interest.

What must a plaintiff show to trigger heightened Equal Protection scrutiny for a facially neutral law?

The plaintiff must prove both discriminatory intent/purpose and discriminatory effect; a disparate impact alone is insufficient to trigger strict or intermediate scrutiny (Washington v. Davis).

How does Equal Protection treat gender classifications, and which party bears the burden?

Gender classifications receive intermediate scrutiny and must be substantially related to an important government interest, with an "exceedingly persuasive justification" (VMI). The government bears the burden, and the justification cannot rely on overbroad gender stereotypes.

What are the two categories of governmental action under the Takings Clause, and the remedy?

(1) Possessory/physical takings — government occupation or permanent physical invasion (per se taking). (2) Regulatory takings — regulation that goes too far. A regulation denying all economically beneficial use is a per se taking (Lukas); otherwise courts apply the Penn Central factors (economic impact, interference with investment-backed expectations, character of the action). The remedy for a taking is just compensation (fair market value).

What is the "public use" requirement of the Takings Clause after Kelo?

Public use is broadly construed to mean a public purpose; government may take private property and transfer it to another private party if the taking is rationally related to a conceivable public benefit, such as economic development (Kelo v. City of New London).

What is the test for content-based versus content-neutral speech regulations?

Content-based regulations (targeting subject matter or viewpoint) are presumptively invalid and get strict scrutiny — necessary to serve a compelling interest. Content-neutral regulations get intermediate scrutiny under the time, place, and manner test.

State the time, place, and manner test for speech in a public forum.

In a traditional or designated public forum, content-neutral restrictions are valid if they (1) are narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest and (2) leave open ample alternative channels of communication. Content-based restrictions get strict scrutiny.

List the categories of unprotected or less-protected speech.

Incitement to imminent lawless action (Brandenburg); fighting words; true threats; obscenity (Miller test); defamation; child pornography; and speech integral to criminal conduct. Commercial speech receives intermediate protection under the Central Hudson test.

State the Brandenburg test for incitement.

Speech advocating illegal action may be punished only if it is (1) directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and (2) likely to incite or produce such action.

State the Miller test for obscenity.

Material is obscene if (1) the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find it appeals to the prurient interest; (2) it depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way as defined by applicable law; and (3) taken as a whole, it lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (the last judged by a national reasonable-person standard).

What is the test for restrictions on commercial speech (Central Hudson)?

For speech that is lawful and not misleading, the regulation must (1) serve a substantial government interest, (2) directly advance that interest, and (3) be no more extensive than necessary (a narrow-tailoring / reasonable-fit requirement). Misleading or unlawful commercial speech is unprotected.

What freedom of association protection applies to compelled disclosure or forced membership?

Freedom of association protects the right to associate for expressive purposes; laws that infringe it (e.g., compelled disclosure of membership or forced inclusion of unwanted members that impairs the group's message) are subject to strict scrutiny — narrowly tailored to a compelling interest (NAACP v. Alabama; Boy Scouts v. Dale).

What is the current test for laws challenged under the Free Exercise Clause?

A neutral law of general applicability that incidentally burdens religion needs only a rational basis (Employment Division v. Smith). But laws that are not neutral or not generally applicable — targeting religious conduct — get strict scrutiny (Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye).

How are Establishment Clause challenges analyzed after Kennedy v. Bremerton?

The Supreme Court abandoned the Lemon test and now interprets the Establishment Clause by reference to historical practices and understandings (the history-and-tradition test), asking whether the government practice accords with this nation's historical tradition regarding religion.

What is the rule on prior restraints and the press?

Prior restraints (court orders or systems barring speech before publication) bear a heavy presumption of unconstitutionality. The government must meet an extraordinarily high burden; even claims of national security rarely justify them (Near v. Minnesota; New York Times Co. v. United States — the Pentagon Papers case).

What defamation standard applies to public officials and public figures versus private figures?

Public officials and public figures must prove "actual malice" — that the defendant published with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth (New York Times v. Sullivan). Private figures on matters of public concern need only prove negligence to recover actual damages (Gertz v. Robert Welch).

Distinguish the Article IV Privileges and Immunities Clause from the Fourteenth Amendment Privileges or Immunities Clause.

The Article IV (Comity) Clause bars a state from discriminating against out-of-state citizens regarding fundamental rights or essential economic activities (e.g., the right to earn a living), unless the state shows a substantial justification and no less restrictive means; it protects only individual citizens, not corporations or aliens. The Fourteenth Amendment Clause protects only the narrow rights of national citizenship (e.g., the right to interstate travel) and is rarely invoked.

Who can invoke the Article IV Privileges and Immunities Clause, and what kind of discrimination triggers it?

Only individual U.S. citizens of other states may invoke it (not corporations or aliens). It is triggered when a state intentionally discriminates against nonresidents regarding fundamental rights — chiefly the pursuit of a livelihood or essential commercial activities — and the state must justify the discrimination with a substantial reason closely related to nonresidents.