OH Bar Constitutional Law Flashcards

The constitutional prohibition on ex post facto laws prevents the government from doing which of the following?

Answer: Criminalizing an act after it was committed or increasing punishment retroactively

The Ex Post Facto Clause bars retroactive laws that criminalize previously lawful conduct, increase punishment for a prior offense, or deprive defendants of a defense available at the time of the act.

Under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause, a neutral and generally applicable law that incidentally burdens religious practice is subject to what level of review?

Answer: Rational basis

Under Employment Division v. Smith, neutral laws of general applicability that incidentally burden religion are subject only to rational basis review; strict scrutiny is reserved for laws that target religion.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment protects against which of the following?

Answer: Being tried twice for the same offense after acquittal or conviction

Double jeopardy bars the government from prosecuting a defendant a second time for the same offense after acquittal or conviction, or imposing multiple punishments for the same offense in a single proceeding.

Which doctrine allows the Supreme Court to decline deciding a constitutional question when a case can be resolved on non-constitutional grounds?

Answer: Constitutional avoidance canon

The constitutional avoidance canon instructs courts to interpret statutes to avoid raising constitutional issues when a reasonable alternative interpretation is available.

The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in McDonald v. City of Chicago, applies to the states through which constitutional provision?

Answer: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Supreme Court held the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states via the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

When analyzing whether government speech or a public employee's speech is protected by the First Amendment, courts first ask:

Answer: Whether the employee spoke as a citizen on a matter of public concern

Under Garcetti v. Ceballos, a public employee's speech is protected by the First Amendment only if the employee spoke as a citizen (not pursuant to official duties) on a matter of public concern.