STERN BUS 207 NOTES
STERN BUS 207 NOTES 207
Popular in Business Law
Popular in Department
This 3 page Class Notes was uploaded by Shelby Kolb on Tuesday May 3, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to 207 at California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo taught by Stephen Stern in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 20 views.
Reviews for STERN BUS 207 NOTES
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 05/03/16
May 3(Constitutional Law cont) ; Heart of Atlanta Motel vs. U.S. o the U.S. Congress could use the power granted to it by the Constitution's Commerce Clause to force private businesses to abide by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. o Motel owner argued that government was taking away his property ownership rights and going against his 13 amendment rights by making “him a slave to the governments requirements” Commercial speech little less protected then pure speech. Commercial speech= central Hudson test. Using speech for advertising/to sell something. Pure speech = strict scrutiny test. Personal beliefs/freedom of expression. (music)(pretty much political speech) Rational Basis Test= The level of judicial review for determining the constitutionality of a federal or state statute that does not implicate either a fundamental right or a suspect classification under the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. When a court concludes that there is no fundamental liberty interest or suspect classification at stake, the law is presumed to be Constitutional unless it fails the rational basis test. Under the rational basis test, the courts will uphold a law if it is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose. The challenger of the constitutionality of the statute has the burden of proving that there is no conceivable legitimate purpose or that the law is not rationally related to it. This test is the most deferential of the three levels of review in due process or equal protection analysis (the other two levels being intermediate scrutiny and strict scrutiny), and it requires only a minimum level of judicial scrutiny. E.g., courts use the rational basis test when analyzing the constitutionality of statutes involving curfews, economic/tax increases, age discrimination, disability discrimination, or the Congressional regulation of aliens. Intermediate Scrutiny= Intermediate scrutiny is a test used in some contexts to determine a law's constitutionality. To pass intermediate scrutiny, the challenged law must further an important government interest by means that are substantially related to that interest. As the name implies, intermediate scrutiny is less rigorous than strict scrutiny, but more rigorous than rational basis review. Intermediate scrutiny is used in equal protection challenges to gender classifications, as well as in some First Amendment cases. Strict Scrutiny= Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of certain laws. To pass strict scrutiny, the legislature must have passed the law to further a "compelling governmental interest," and must have narrowly tailored the law to achieve that interest. A famous quip asserts that strict scrutiny is "strict in name, but fatal in practice." For a court to apply strict scrutiny, the legislature must either have significantly abridged a fundamental right with the law's enactment or have passed a law that involves a suspect classification. Suspect classifications have come to include race, national origin, religion, alienage, and poverty. Griswald v. Connecticut 1965 o Griswald= executive and medical director of Planned Parenthood. Arrested and charged for giving information about abortion. o 1879 Connecticut law stated : NO ABORTIONS and NO COUNSELING. Punishment for breaking 1879 law? no less than $40 fine, no less than 60 days in prison. o Case goes to US Supreme Court. Court REJECTS 1879 law and finds it in violation of the 1 , 14 , and 9 amendment. o 9 amendment Penumbras and emotions. Whatever wasn’t explained specifically in the first 8 amendments is reserved in the th 9 . Privacy rights!! o Bowers v. Hardwick o Hardwick = male companion arrested for performing oral sex. o Bowers= officer that barges in on Hardwick after ticketing him for public drinking. o 1986 Georgia Law no sodomy sex th o Hardwick argues that it is violating 14 Equal Protection clause for punishing gay sex. o Case goes to US Supreme Court th After Griswald and 9 amendment… o Supreme Court upholds sodomy law. All persons, married or not, no oral or anal sex… only really held for gay. Court argues that there is no fundamental right to sodomy. o Lawrence v, Texas 2003 o Lawrence was arrested for sodomy. o Argued for violation of Equal Protection Clause o Supreme Court strikes down sodomy law because you have a fundamental right to privacy. Warren and Brandeis (1890) > Right to Privacy (You can now SUE under these) o Unreasonable intrusion= if someone peers thru a telescope at you through your window. o Public Disclosure of Private Facts= if you publically tell something about another person. o False Lights= if newspaper says something about the WRONG person and doesn’t fix it right away. o Misappropriation of Name or Likeness= make it seem like a celebrity supports or promotes a product
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'