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?

City’s ordinances make City’s building inspector responsible for enforcing building code standards and authorizes the inspector to refer for prosecution all known building code violations. The inspector took a newspaper reporter through a number of rundown buildings in a slum neighborhood. After using various slurs to describe the occupants of the buildings, the inspector said to the reporter: “I don’t even try to get these buildings up to code or to get their owners prosecuted because if these buildings ever were repaired, the people who live in them would just wreck them again.” The reporter published the inspector’s statement in a story in the local newspaper. The inspector admitted he made the statements. On the basis of the statements and on the authority of another ordinance that allows the inspector to be fired for “good cause,” City’s council discharged the inspector. Is the City council’s action constitutional?

Church employed Don to plan and lead the musical portions of its weekly worship services. After several disagreements over the music, Church terminated Don. Don alleged that the discharge was retaliatory and brings an appropriate wrongful termination action in court. How should the court rule on Church’s motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction?

Which of the following are factors the federal courts must consider in connection with a determination of unitariness, or constitutionally mandated desegregated status?

A Senate sub-committee conducted hearings on Unexplained Aerial Phenomena (“UAP”) based upon increased media reports of unusual sightings in the skies over the United States. Several of the hearings were closed to the public due to the sensitive nature of the testimony being offered by members of the military who had encountered such UAPs. The Washington Gazette, a newspaper with national readership, obtained a copy of the transcripts of the closed hearings and has informed the sub-committee’s chairperson of its intent to publish the transcripts.  If the chairperson sues in a court of proper jurisdiction to enjoin the publication, the court should:

Private organizers of an annual parade were required under a state public accommodations law to include among the marchers even those groups whose message the organizers did not wish to convey. A group representing lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals applied for a permit to be included in a St. Patrick’s Day parade celebrating Irish heritage for the purpose of expressing the LGBT members’ pride in their sexual orientation. When the application was denied, the group brought suit against the parade organizers, alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation. The trial court held that the parade organizers had violated the public accommodations law and ordered the organizers to include the group in the parade. The highest state appellate court affirmed the order.  If the United States Supreme Court grants certiorari, will it affirm the lower courts’ rulings?

Which of the following statements of constitutional jurisprudence is correct?