DIFFICULT CONSTITUTIONAL LAW QUESTION for bar takers
| sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | grizzly casino really tough guy | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | amber metal stag film main people | 02/22/12 | | grizzly casino really tough guy | 02/22/12 | | insanely creepy area gaping | 02/22/12 | | Fluffy Bawdyhouse Brethren | 02/23/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/23/12 | | Fluffy Bawdyhouse Brethren | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 10/02/15 | | Aromatic chapel | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 10/13/15 | | Peach provocative market striped hyena | 03/30/12 | | flatulent lay | 03/30/12 | | vengeful kink-friendly wagecucks | 05/01/12 | | sickened center | 05/01/12 | | vengeful kink-friendly wagecucks | 05/01/12 | | sickened center | 05/01/12 | | vengeful kink-friendly wagecucks | 05/01/12 | | diverse spot round eye | 05/01/12 | | sooty tripping kitchen | 05/01/12 | | pearl orchestra pit doctorate | 06/08/12 | | Learning disabled principal's office black woman | 06/08/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 06/08/12 | | Learning disabled principal's office black woman | 06/08/12 | | bossy cracking box office mother | 02/22/12 | | buck-toothed lake stain | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 04/14/12 | | grizzly casino really tough guy | 02/22/12 | | Marvelous knife | 02/23/12 | | amber metal stag film main people | 02/22/12 | | Fluffy Bawdyhouse Brethren | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 05/01/12 | | vengeful kink-friendly wagecucks | 05/01/12 | | Aromatic chapel | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 03/30/12 | | sickened center | 11/20/15 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/22/12 | | Low-t associate stage | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | Low-t associate stage | 02/22/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/22/12 | | Low-t associate stage | 02/22/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/22/12 | | Aromatic chapel | 02/23/12 | | Federal dashing corner depressive | 06/26/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | Low-t associate stage | 02/22/12 | | flirting bonkers stead trump supporter | 03/14/12 | | Aromatic chapel | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 03/14/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Low-t associate stage | 02/22/12 | | Aromatic chapel | 02/23/12 | | bossy cracking box office mother | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | grizzly casino really tough guy | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Heady indirect expression trailer park | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/23/12 | | Federal dashing corner depressive | 06/26/12 | | buck-toothed lake stain | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/27/12 | | insanely creepy area gaping | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | insanely creepy area gaping | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | insanely creepy area gaping | 02/22/12 | | Federal dashing corner depressive | 06/26/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | buck-toothed lake stain | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | insanely creepy area gaping | 02/22/12 | | amber metal stag film main people | 02/22/12 | | Low-t associate stage | 02/22/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/23/12 | | amber metal stag film main people | 02/23/12 | | Copper bateful deer antler jew | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 06/25/12 | | Hyperventilating Roast Beef | 02/22/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | amber metal stag film main people | 02/22/12 | | vengeful kink-friendly wagecucks | 05/01/12 | | sickened center | 07/06/12 | | crawly house | 02/22/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/22/12 | | Aromatic chapel | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 02/22/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/23/12 | | amber metal stag film main people | 02/23/12 | | Sapphire cerebral abode | 02/23/12 | | sickened center | 02/25/12 | | dun site double fault | 05/01/12 | | sickened center | 05/01/12 | | diverse spot round eye | 05/01/12 | | sickened center | 07/12/12 | | sickened center | 09/27/14 | | Bull headed razzmatazz shitlib | 09/30/14 | | insanely creepy area gaping | 09/30/14 | | bright boiling water | 09/30/14 | | Chestnut Old Irish Cottage Cumskin | 09/30/14 | | Ruddy Shrine | 09/30/14 | | Brass fiercely-loyal laser beams milk | 09/30/14 | | Razzle drab temple | 09/30/14 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 22nd, 2012 4:44 PM Author: sickened center
A state built a casino and issued bonds to finance its construction. On five occasions, there were episodes of violence in various casinos in the state. The state police attributed the violence to greed at casinos.
To prevent violence, state legislature passed statute prohibiting all gambling at privately owned casinos in the state. Is this law likely to held constitutional if most casinos in the state were owned by those from out of the state?
A. Yes, because the act was expressly authorized the state legislature.
B. Yes, but only if the local interest in safety outweighs the burden to interstate commerce.
C. No because out of state casions rights under the Privileges and Immunity Clause of Article IV is violated.
D. No, because the statue violates due process rights of the owners of the casinos.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20028444)
|
Date: February 22nd, 2012 4:45 PM Author: sickened center
PUBLIC School protocol says cant grow beard or mustache too long. Student grows it too long. High school suspends the kid for an automatic five-day suspension. Student, who was aware of the rule, requested a trial-type hearing before suspension was imposed.
If the school board denies students request for a trial type hearing, which of the following is accurate?
A. The suspension violated the student's due process rights because it violated the entitlement to an education
B. The denial did not violate the students due process rights under the circumstances, because he had no right to a hearing
C. The denial of a trial type hearing violated the student's due process rights because the suspension was arbitrarily imposed prior to a meaningful hearing
D. There was no violation of the student's due process because his conduct was injurious to school discipline and the measure was rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20028460) |
Date: February 22nd, 2012 4:49 PM Author: sickened center
A citizen of a state was arrested and charged with violating a state statue making it a felony for a "male to sell or give beer bevergaes to a female under the age of 16."
On a challenge to its constitutionality, the court will likely hold:
A. Unconstitutional, because it lacks a rational purpose, and, therefore, is violative of the 14th Amend.
B. Constitutional, because the state could reasonably believe that young females need more protection than males under the circumstances.
C. Unconstitutional, because the law treats males and females differently, and thus violates the equal protection clause of the 14th.
D. Constitutional, because under the 21st Amendment, a state has authority to regulate the use and sale of intoxicating liquors.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20028504)
|
Date: February 22nd, 2012 4:51 PM Author: sickened center
A three old girl has severe jaundice (a bad medical condition). A pediatrician informed the infant's father that unless his daughter received immediate medical attention, she'd die. The father, very religious and devout Jehovah Witness, REFUSED to permit the doctor to administer the treatment. He said God would restore his daughter to health, not medication.
Doctor seeks an order from the state court, permitting the doctor to provide necessary med treatment to infant.
What is the father's strongest con law argument against a potential court order that would mandate treatment:
A. The order violates due process under the 14th
B. The order would be an arbitrary and irrational intrusion into his private rearing of his child.
C. The order violates the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, as incorporated into the 14th.
D. The order violate the privileges and imm of 14th.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20028522)
|
Date: February 22nd, 2012 4:53 PM Author: sickened center
5 year old baby comes down with a severe, life-threatning fever. Pediatrician warns mother that unless her son gets immediate medical treatment, he'll die. Mother objects on religius grounds, claiming that it would better for her son to die if that was his fate. Doctor seeks an order from the state court.
In deciding whether it may issue such an order, which of the following must the state court consider?
A. Whether medical treatment is necessary to save the baby's life
B. Whether the hospital is owned and operated by the state or privately owned.
C. Whether the mother's refusal to authorize medical treatment is justified on the basis of current medical knowledge.
D. Whether the mother is a taxpayer of the state in which the court is located.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20028553) |
Date: February 22nd, 2012 4:56 PM Author: sickened center
Congress enacts statute: "The US Armed Forces are hereby prohibited from conducting military exercises with foreign military forces unless Congress has received notice of such intention to take such action at least 3 months before joint military exercises become effective."
The statute is most likely,
A. Constitutional, as an implied power under the War Powers Resolution Act.
B. Unconstitutional, because it infringes on the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.
C. Constitutional, because the President has not been called into actual service as Commander-in-Chief.
D. Unconstitutional, because it infringes upon the President's plenary power over foreign affairs.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20028869)
|
Date: February 22nd, 2012 5:01 PM Author: sickened center
Congress enacts a statute legalizing weed. The law, signed by the President, imposes a tax of $1 on each pack of marijuana cigs sold in the US. In an inseverable portion of that same law, the entire proceeds are appropriated on a continuing basis for direct payments to a public art museum.
Who has standing to attack constitutionality of this appropriation of the tax monies to art museum?
A. A state, other than the one in which the museum is located, in which the several other public museums are located that are not subsidized by this law.
B. A purchaser of mary jane cigs who is required to pay the tax
C. A non profit organization of war veterans who claim that it can demonstrate a greater need for the funds than can museum.
D. An association of med doctors that allege legalization of mary jane will result in a health hazard.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20029164)
|
Date: February 22nd, 2012 5:05 PM Author: sickened center
Darlene knew that Drake hated Drew. Darlene gave Drake a gun and told him to shoot and kill Drew. Darlene knew that the gun was unloaded. Thereafter, Drake approached Drew, pointed gun at him, and pulled trigger. The gun did not discharge because it was unloaded.
Most accurate statement of Darlene and Drake's criminal liablity is:
A. Darlene and Drake are both guilty of attempted murder.
B. Drake is guilty of attempted murder, and Darlene is guilty of solicitation.
C Darlene is guilty of attempted murder, and Drake is guilty of solicitation.
D. Drake is guilty attempted murder, and Darlene is not guilty of solicitation.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20029201) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2012 5:23 PM Author: Aromatic chapel
Unlike conspiracy, there is no overt step necessary for solicitation, one person can be a defendant, and it merges with the substantive crime.
It is not necessary that the person actually commit the crime, nor is it necessary that the person solicited be willing or able to commit the crime (such as if the "solicitee" were an undercover police officer).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solicitation#United_States
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20037249) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2012 4:51 PM Author: amber metal stag film main people
i don't think it's flame, it's the kind of slippy question that appears here and there on the MBE
dood's pointing gun & pulling trigger = enough to assume that intended to kill the guy. if the facts were as he believed (gun was loaded) he would have been succeeded in the crime. if drew didn't think the gun was loaded the facts would say that. he gets attempt without a question
darlene = solicitation only requires inciting someone to commit a crime with the intent that they do commit it, and it's not a defense that the offense solicited couldn't have been successful. the hitch is that by giving him an unloaded gun you could argue she lacked the intent for the crime to actually be committed. the counter to that would be that she might have thought that he would check the gun first and put bullets in it. since the bar doesn't usually want you to read facts like that in, i would go with she's not guilty of solicitation since she specifically asked the dude to kill the guy knowing that it wasn't possible and thus didn't actually have the requisite intent that he commit a felony.
another argument would be that she was actually soliciting him to do an assault and that this was a success, but again, they would have facts pointing to an assault being completed (dude was scared or w/e)
you know what, nevermind, this Q is flame whether it's an NCBE question or not
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1880585&forum_id=2#20037101) |
|
|