The student body of a high school in Ames City has elected a student “chaplain” to the student council. The new student chaplain begins a practice of saying grace in the cafeteria before the lunch period. It is student-led, but faculty and staff have tolerated the practice, even participating by standing with the students and bowing their heads. A group of students and their parents object, claiming that the practice violates the Establishment Clause. The group files suit in federal court. The judge hearing the case will likely:

Several public high school students asked the superintendent of their public school district whether the minister of a local church could deliver an interdenominational prayer at their graduation ceremony in the school auditorium. None of the students or their guests at graduation would be required to pray while the minister delivered the prayer.  Would the minister’s delivery of such a prayer at the public high school graduation be constitutional? 

A critically acclaimed movie that had received a number of awards opened in a small town. The film had portrayals of nudity and scenes involving sexuality, but its advertising was very tasteful and concentrated on its critical acclaim and its receipt of seven Academy Award nominations. Nevertheless, when the movie opened in the small town, there was a public outcry against it, including picketing. The town, which had been founded in the late nineteenth century by a fundamentalist religious group, remained very conservative and highly religious, and was the only community in the state where a consensus of the community would find the movie to be obscene. The town prosecutor went to the local court seeking an injunction to halt the showing of the movie. The theater owner refused to voluntarily stop showing the film and appeared in court to defend against the proposed injunction. What is the owner’s best defense?

A city ordinance that gave churches veto power over the grant of liquor licenses for businesses within a quarter mile of the church was struck down by the state’s supreme court. In its decision, the court noted that even if the ordinance were not a violation of the federal Establishment Clause, it clearly violated a provision in the state constitution requiring the separation of church and state because it delegated governmental authority to the churches. The supreme court opinion also harshly criticized the city council for passing an ordinance that was clearly a violation of state law. To comply with the court’s decision and avoid future criticism, the city council adopted an ordinance prohibiting any cleric from sitting on any public board within the city. A cleric who is currently on a school board within the city brings a suit in federal district court to have the ordinance declared unconstitutional. How should the court rule?

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?