After their excellent adventures back in time and to the underworld, Bill and Ted graduate from high school and join the Be Excellent to Each Other Church. They get jobs at a private drug-rehab agency on the condition that they do not use any drugs. Bill and Ted ingest peyote while participating in a church service, and get fired from their jobs. The use of peyote is criminal in their state. They apply for unemployment compensation but are denied benefits on grounds they had been fired for good cause. They challenge their denial of benefits on First Amendment grounds. The denial is unconstitutional. 

A state that is subject to severe winters generally allows the use of studded tires between October 1 and March 31. However, the legislation allows counties to opt out and prohibit the use of studded tires year round, because studded tires tend to tear up pavement more than nonstudded tires, thus necessitating more frequent road repairs. No other state in the region allows use of studded snow tires at all. The state law contains one exception: it excludes “doctors” from any county ban on the use of snow tires because they might have to cross county lines in emergencies. After the passage of the legislation, only one county in the state invoked its right to ban the use of studded snow tires. A lawyer who lives in the state was angered that the legislature had given special privileges to doctors but not to lawyers. One January day, with studded tires on his car, he drove from his home county, which allowed use of studded tires, into the county that banned them. A sheriff’s officer noticed the lawyer’s studded tires and cited him. After being convicted and fined, the lawyer appealed. What is the lawyer’s best argument for getting the ban invalidated?

Laws subject to the rational relation test may be struck down in some situations. When could this happen?

Congress has recently enacted legislation that makes it a federal crime for any person to interfere with any right conferred by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The statute may be applied constitutionally in which of the following situations?

A state legislature recently enacted a statute imposing a “land utilization tax” on those operating businesses within the state who pay no property taxes. The state seeks to apply the tax to the owner of a small restaurant and store that is located in a national park within the state. The owner operates the restaurant and store pursuant to a contract with the United States Government and pays no property taxes. Which of the following is the owner’s best constitutional argument against application of the tax to her?

A city high school had a very high rate of pregnancy among its students. In order to assist students who wish to keep their babies and complete high school, the city high school established an infant center that provides daycare for children of its students and childcare classes to its students. Because the childcare classes are always overcrowded, the city high school limits admission to student mothers who utilize daycare in the infant center.A male student at the city high school has legal custody of his infant son. The city high school provides daycare for the student’s son, but it will not allow the student to enroll in the childcare classes. The student brought suit against the city high school, challenging on constitutional grounds his exclusion from the childcare classes.Which of the following best states the burden of persuasion in this case?

The Encounters Construction Co., a Caucasian-owned construction company, submits the lowest bid for a subcontract to construct telescopes for a UFO-watching tower in rural Nevada. However, the general contractor accepts a bid from E.T. Ltd., a minority-owned firm qualifying under congressionally authorized regulations as a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise. The prime contractor awards the contract to E.T., and for doing so receives a financial incentive from the federal government. Encounters Construction brings suit. What type of scrutiny will this federal regulation have to meet?

The State of Ames requires that all uniformed police officers retire at age 50 in an effort to ensure their physical fitness and mental. The law does not apply to detectives or other plainclothes police officers. Phil sues, claiming that the law violates equal protection. He notes that many officers under 50 are neither physically fit nor mentally alert. He also argues that it is a violation to single out uniformed cops for this treatment while allowing detectives 50 years old and older to remain on the force. A reviewing court should:

A state’s constitution authorizes a state reapportionment board to redraw state legislative districts every 12 years. During the most recent reapportionment process, consultants had provided the board with two alternative plans for reapportionment. One plan provided for districts with less than a 3% difference in proportional representation between districts. The other plan was drawn up to conform state legislative districts as nearly as possible to county borders, resulting in differences in proportional representation between districts of up to 12%. The current apportionment of legislative districts results in differences of up to 15% between districts. The board ultimately selected the reapportionment plan based on county borders, and this plan was approved by the state legislature. A Caucasian resident and registered voter of the state brought a constitutional challenge to the reapportionment in federal court. His claim is based on the fact that, as a result of the plan that the board selected, the percentage of the African-American voting population in the district in which he lives increased from 45% to 55%. Had the other plan been selected, the percentage would have been unchanged in his district. In the absence of a federal statute applicable to the state, is the resident likely to prevail?

Recent evidence reported in leading medical journals suggests that hearing loss affects 75% of citizens over the age of 70. A state legislature, concerned with increasing the quality of care to its senior citizens, passes a bill providing that only medical doctors with specialized training in audiology may prescribe and sell hearing aids. The law provides a “grandfather clause” however, exempting all currently registered vendors of hearing aids who have no medical training, as long as they remain in business. A doctor who operates a hearing clinic, brings suit challenging the “grandfather clause” exemption in the new statute. Is the exemption in the law for all currently registered vendors of hearing aids constitutional?