Multistate Bar Exam Constitutional Law 4

Question 1

The government seizes a landowner's property for a private shopping mall development under eminent domain, offering fair market value. The landowner argues this violates the Takings Clause. Under Kelo v. City of New London, the taking is:

Accepted Answer

Constitutional because economic development can satisfy the 'public use' requirement

Answer

In Kelo v. City of New London, the Court held that transferring land to private developers for economic development qualifies as 'public use' under the Takings Clause, provided just compensation is paid.

Question 2

A state enacts a law prohibiting the sale of video games depicting graphic violence to minors. The law is challenged on First Amendment grounds. The court should apply:

Accepted Answer

Strict scrutiny, because video games are protected speech and there is no recognized 'violence' exception for minors

Answer

In Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n, the Court held that video games are protected speech, violence is not a category exempt from First Amendment protection, and such laws must survive strict scrutiny.

Question 3

A federal law grants Native American tribes the exclusive right to operate casinos in states that permit casino gambling. A competing non-tribal casino operator challenges the law under the Equal Protection Clause. The court should apply:

Accepted Answer

Rational basis review, because laws regarding Native American tribes are reviewed under Congress's plenary power over Indian affairs

Answer

Under Morton v. Mancari, federal legislation singling out Native American tribes is reviewed under rational basis because it reflects Congress's unique plenary authority over Indian affairs, not racial classification.

Question 4

A police officer stops a car at a sobriety checkpoint and, without any individualized suspicion, detains the driver for two minutes to check for signs of intoxication. Under Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, this stop is:

Accepted Answer

Constitutional because the minimal intrusion is outweighed by the state's strong interest in highway safety

Answer

In Michigan v. Sitz, the Court applied balancing analysis and upheld sobriety checkpoints as constitutionally permissible despite the absence of individualized suspicion given the state's compelling highway safety interest.

Question 5

Congress passes the 'Balanced Budget Act,' requiring the President to cancel individual spending items after a bill is signed into law. The President uses this power to eliminate a tax break for particular companies. The law is most likely:

Accepted Answer

Unconstitutional because it gives the President a line-item veto power not authorized by Article I's Presentment Clause

Answer

In Clinton v. City of New York, the Court struck down the Line Item Veto Act because it allowed the President to unilaterally amend or repeal acts of Congress, violating the Presentment Clause procedures.

Multistate Bar Exam Practice Test

Multistate Bar Exam Practice Test

Multistate Bar Exam Constitutional Law 4