Constitutional Law Flashcards

What standard of review applies to content-based restrictions on speech under the First Amendment?

Answer: Strict scrutiny

Content-based restrictions on speech are presumptively unconstitutional and must survive strict scrutiny, requiring a compelling government interest and narrow tailoring.

Under Mathews v. Eldridge, which factors determine how much procedural due process is required before a government deprivation?

Answer: Private interest, risk of erroneous deprivation, and government's interest

Mathews v. Eldridge established a three-factor balancing test weighing the private interest at stake, the risk of erroneous deprivation, and the government's interest.

Which level of scrutiny applies to gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause?

Answer: Intermediate scrutiny

Gender classifications are quasi-suspect and subject to intermediate scrutiny, requiring the government to show an important interest achieved by substantially related means.

Under Brandenburg v. Ohio, the government may constitutionally punish speech when it is:

Answer: Directed to inciting imminent lawless action and likely to produce such action

Brandenburg requires that speech be both directed to inciting imminent lawless action AND likely to produce such action before the government may restrict it.

The Establishment Clause prohibits government from:

Answer: Making any law respecting an establishment of religion

The Establishment Clause prohibits government from making laws respecting an establishment of religion, including laws that favor or disfavor any religion.

Under Employment Division v. Smith, a neutral, generally applicable law that incidentally burdens religious practice:

Answer: Is generally constitutional without heightened justification

Smith held that neutral, generally applicable laws that incidentally burden religion do not violate the Free Exercise Clause and need not satisfy heightened scrutiny.

Under the Takings Clause, when the government physically invades private property, even minimally, what result follows?

Answer: A per se taking occurs requiring just compensation

A physical invasion of private property, however minimal, constitutes a per se taking under Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., requiring just compensation.