SC Bar Constitutional Law 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: In Gonzales v. Raich, the Supreme Court upheld federal regulation of locally grown marijuana under the Commerce Clause because:
- The Necessary and Proper Clause gave Congress plenary power over all drug activity
- Marijuana trafficking is inherently an interstate criminal enterprise
- Local marijuana use, in the aggregate, substantially affected the interstate marijuana market (Correct answer)
- Congress had a rational basis for classifying marijuana as a Schedule I substance
Correct answer: Local marijuana use, in the aggregate, substantially affected the interstate marijuana market
In Raich, the Court applied the aggregation principle from Wickard v. Filburn, holding that Congress could regulate local marijuana cultivation because, in the aggregate, such activity substantially affected the national illegal marijuana market.
Question 2: The Dormant Commerce Clause doctrine prohibits states from:
- Enacting any tax that affects goods moving across state lines
- Exercising concurrent regulatory power in areas where Congress has legislated
- Discriminating against interstate commerce or imposing undue burdens on it (Correct answer)
- Regulating commerce in the complete absence of any federal regulation
Correct answer: Discriminating against interstate commerce or imposing undue burdens on it
The Dormant Commerce Clause prevents states from enacting laws that discriminate against interstate commerce or impose undue burdens on it, even when Congress has not legislated on the subject.
Question 3: Under the anti-commandeering principle from Printz v. United States, Congress:
- May require states to allow federal inspectors on state property
- May require state officials to implement federal gun background check systems
- Cannot compel state executive officials to administer federal regulatory programs (Correct answer)
- Cannot offer incentive grants to encourage states to adopt federal policy objectives
Correct answer: Cannot compel state executive officials to administer federal regulatory programs
In Printz, the Court held that Congress violates the structural principle of dual sovereignty when it compels state executive officials to implement or administer federal regulatory programs.
Question 4: A state law that facially discriminates against out-of-state competitors under the Dormant Commerce Clause is:
- Constitutional if the state demonstrates a legitimate interest in protecting local industry
- Subject to a balancing test weighing local benefits against the burdens on interstate commerce
- Exempt under the market participant exception in all circumstances
- Virtually per se invalid unless the state shows no non-discriminatory alternatives exist to serve legitimate local purposes (Correct answer)
Correct answer: Virtually per se invalid unless the state shows no non-discriminatory alternatives exist to serve legitimate local purposes
Facial discrimination against interstate commerce triggers a virtually per se rule of invalidity; the state must prove there are no reasonable non-discriminatory alternatives and that it serves a legitimate local purpose unrelated to economic protectionism.
Question 5: Field preemption under the Supremacy Clause occurs when:
- Congress explicitly states that federal law supersedes all state law on a subject
- State law directly contradicts federal law making compliance with both impossible
- The federal regulatory scheme is so pervasive that Congress intended to occupy the entire regulatory field (Correct answer)
- A federal agency issues regulations covering the same conduct as a state statute
Correct answer: The federal regulatory scheme is so pervasive that Congress intended to occupy the entire regulatory field
Field preemption arises when Congress has enacted such a comprehensive scheme of regulation that the intent to occupy the entire field can be inferred, leaving no room for state supplementation.
Question 6: Under the Spending Power, Congress may attach conditions to federal grants to states provided that:
- The condition directly compels states to enact or enforce federal law
- The conditions are unambiguous, related to the federal interest, and not unconstitutionally coercive (Correct answer)
- The President personally approves each condition before funds are disbursed
- The condition applies only to the funds granted, not to all state spending
Correct answer: The conditions are unambiguous, related to the federal interest, and not unconstitutionally coercive
Under South Dakota v. Dole, spending conditions are valid if they are unambiguous, related to the federal interest, do not violate constitutional provisions, and are not so coercive as to amount to compulsion rather than inducement.
Question 7: Under the Appointments Clause of Article II, 'inferior officers' of the United States may be appointed by:
- Only the President with Senate confirmation in all cases
- Congress alone through legislation without presidential involvement
- The President alone, heads of departments, or courts of law, as Congress may by law provide (Correct answer)
- The Vice President acting as President of the Senate
Correct answer: The President alone, heads of departments, or courts of law, as Congress may by law provide
The Appointments Clause allows Congress to vest the appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in department heads, or in courts of law, bypassing the default Senate confirmation requirement applicable to principal officers.
SC Bar Constitutional Law 2
In Gonzales v.
Raich, the Supreme Court upheld federal regulation of locally grown marijuana under the Commerce Clause because: