Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023), which of the following hypothetical actions by a college admissions officer would be most likely to be considered constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause?

Which of the following statements about the U.S. Constitution is FALSE

Which of the following best describes the representation-reinforcement method of constitutional interpretation, as popularized by Professor John Hart Ely?  

Under what circumstances will courts apply rational basis scrutiny in a Substantive Due Process case?

Which of the following is a requirement for Congress’s lawful use of its Spending Clause power, as outlined in cases like South Dakota v. Dole?  

Which of the following best describes the difference between procedural due process and substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment?  

A state enacts a law that significantly restricts the voting rights of a specific racial minority group, arguing that it is necessary to prevent voter fraud. The law is challenged under the Equal Protection Clause. If a court applies the principles outlined in Footnote Four of United States v. Carolene Products Co. (1938), which of the following is the most likely reason the court would apply heightened scrutiny to this law?  

Which of the following is not an example of a “suspect classification” that would trigger strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Which of the following best describes the facts and essential holding of United States v. Virginia (1996)?

Which of the following best describes the evolution of the Supreme Court’s equal protection doctrine regarding affirmative action in college admissions from Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) to Gratz v. Bollinger/Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), and most recently to Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023)?