Constitutional Law Notes
Takings Clause and Eminent Domain
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: Private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation.
Vanhorne's Lessee v. Dorrance (1795)
Acknowledges government's power to take private property for state necessity.
Should only be used in urgent cases.
Questions the justification of taking land from one citizen to give to another.
Securing property rights is paramount.
Legislature should not arbitrarily take land from one citizen and give it to another.
It is safer to risk some possible mischiefs than to vest in the legislature such an enormous power.
Key questions in constitutional law regarding takings:
What constitutes a "taking?"
Is it for "public use?"
Has "just" compensation been provided?
Property rights:
Include the rights to own, sell, occupy, exclude others, and use the property.
A "taking" includes deprivation of property rights, not just physical removal.
Contemporary examples of eminent domain proceedings:
Park greenspace
Seizing homes
Eminent domain fights over property
Fight to keep family-owned land
Grandmother may lose home of 70 years to eminent domain.
Moses Rose's Hideout vs. Alamo Museum
Vince Cantu vs. Alamo Trust: Conflict over selling property for the Alamo Visitor Center and Museum project.
Property obstructs planned loading dock and museum gallery access.
Alamo Trust attempted to purchase the bar since 2016, offers did not reflect potential value after redevelopment.
Negotiations at impasse, Alamo Trust urging San Antonio to consider condemnation.
City needs to show it's for a public purpose.
The benefit to the community is having a world-class Alamo campus.
Court would determine fair market value.
Texas Landowners and the Border Wall
Richard Drawe reluctantly agreed to allow construction of a border wall on his family's land.
Selling land was better than fighting in court.
The White House hoped more landowners would make the same decision to meet President Trump's promise to build 450 miles of new border wall by 2021.
Acquisition of private land is a barrier to the wall.
Challenges: Construction contracts, funding delays, and legal decisions.
Limited landowner options: Voluntarily allow access/accept offer or go to court for higher compensation.
Government can begin construction before full payment, arguing it's an emergency.
Right to Refuse Medical Care
Virginia's Hunting Dog Law
Jim Medeiros and other property owners are suing the state over its Right to Refuse Medical Care and the "Right to Die" Forcible Feeding
Forcible Feeding of Suffragettes (1913)
Miss Richardson and Miss Peace were forcibly fed and denied bail and accused but not convicted of setting fire to a property, leading to serious illness.
Miss Richardson experienced pain, neuralgia, indigestion, and throat ulcers due to the nasal tube.
Dr. Pearson oversaw the procedure, allegedly taunting Miss Richardson.
Miss Peace initially stopped her hunger strike but resumed after bail denial, believed to be forcibly fed again.
Right to refuse medical care raises questions about:
Individual bodily autonomy
Public health measures
Religious objections to medical treatments (vaccines, blood transfusions).
Considerations for adults and children, whose healthcare decisions often rely on their parents.
Cases for Consideration:
Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905)
In re E.G. (1989)
Winston v. Lee (1985)
Cruzan v. Missouri Department of Health (1990)
Stamford Hospital v. Vega (1996)
Washington v. Glucksberg (1997)
People v. Kevorkian (2001)
Gonzales v. Oregon (2006)
COVID-19 Pandemic and Vaccination
Raises questions about workers' rights to refuse vaccination.
Examples: Bob Nevens fired for not getting vaccinated, colleges firing employees over vaccine mandates.
Nearly 500 L.A. Unified employees were fired for refusing the coronavirus vaccine.
An Orange County fire battalion chief was fired for not reprimanding unvaccinated firefighters.
Growing backlash against vaccine mandates.
Varying state policies: mandates for some workers, bans/blocks on mandates, or no statewide policy.
Religious Objections to Vaccines
Religious exemptions to vaccine mandates.
Example: COVID-19 religious accommodation employee form from Oklahoma, Tulsa pastor signing thousands of vaccine exemption forms.
TRUE HOPE Ministry: Doctrinal stance against intrusions into the human body (masks, COVID tests, vaccines).
Missouri Department of Health: Religious immunization exemption form for school attendance.
Some states offer non-medical exemptions (religious and personal belief) from immunizations within schools.
Religious objections impede mask and vaccine mandates.
Supreme Court knocked down state constraints on indoor worship services during the COVID-19 crisis.
Religious Gatherings During Pandemic
Partisan divide on restricting in-person worship.
Democrats more likely to say in-person services should not be allowed.
Many churches cancelled services, offered parking lot services or drive-thru prayer.
A ruling protects a group of churches during the coronavirus impact.
A church in Chula Vista, CA received over COVID restrictions.
Legal Challenges to Public Health Policy
Court battles over COVID-19 safety measures and recent rulings impact government's ability to keep Americans safe.
A federal judge in Florida struck down the mask mandate for airports and other public transportation methods.
A Florida pastor was arrested after holding church services despite coronavirus orders.
Right to Reject the Rejectors?
Debate on healthcare providers' right to refuse care to unvaccinated patients.
Dr. Valentine in Florida refuses to see unvaccinated COVID-19 patients.
Businesses (Argosy in East Atlanta, Covington pottery business) refuse service to unvaccinated individuals.
Divide over vaccination status, especially in Canada (workers without valid exemption until Oct. 30 to be vaccinated).
Historical Context: Anti-Vaccination and Smallpox
The Anti-Vaccination Society of America existed in the early 1900s.
Boston experienced a smallpox scare.
State Boards of Health declared vaccination absolutely necessary.
In 1902, about 10,000 were vaccinated in South Boston, Board of Health intended to bring those who refuse into court.
Cambridge reported new smallpox cases, individuals faced charges for not being vaccinated.
Supreme Court upheld vaccination laws in Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905) and Zucht v. King (1922).
Public Health and Individual Rights: Historical Cases
Mary Mallon ("Typhoid Mary"): Asymptomatic carrier of typhoid fever, forcibly quarantined for 26 years.
A Tacoma woman with tuberculosis was found in contempt of court after refusing treatment.
A Tuberculosis Patient Charged in Calif. for not Taking Medication and could be jailed.
New York City to Involuntarily Remove Mentally Ill People From Streets.
Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905) and Pandemic Rights
115-year-old Supreme Court opinion could determine rights during a pandemic.
US appeals court ruled that Texas could prevent physicians from performing abortions because of the Covid-19 pandemic, leaning heavily on Jacobson v. Massachusetts.
Question: How bluntly might Jacobson v. Massachusetts be wielded to justify curbing individual liberties without caveat?
Faith-Healing and Medical Neglect
Faith-healing parents believe prayer is the only acceptable treatment, even if it means letting their children die.
Boys' Parents Deny Guilt from San Bernardino and were charged in the death of an 11 year old diabetic.
Leader of faith-healing sect, charged in death, dies at 64 and taught that medical care is evil.
Christian Scientist parents have been convicted of involuntary manslaughter/child endangerment for relying on prayer instead of medical treatment.
Government obligations: Enforcing child welfare laws vs. protecting religious freedom when parents choose prayer over medical care.
Courts balance these obligations when such decisions harm the child.
Idaho statute 18-1501 protects practitioners of faith healing.
Nearly every U.S. state offers some level of exemption for parents who withhold medical care to their children on religious grounds, with varying degrees of protection.
MI SUPREME COURT RULING: PARENTS WHO REFUSE MEDICAL TREAT BASED ON RELIGION NOT NEGLIGENT.
PARENTS CHARGED when 2 YEAR OLD DIED FROM PNEUMONIA because RELIGION FORBIDS MEDICAL TREATMENT.
Faith healer parents avoid jail after son, 16, dies in horrible pain after they tried to 'pray away' his burst appendix.
MURDER CHARGES STAND FOR FAITH-HEALING PARENTS after 2 of couple's children have died from pneumonia since 2008.
In re E.G. (1989): Forced Medical Procedures During Pregnancy
Appeals court ruled a pregnant woman, even terminally ill, cannot be forced to undergo a Caesarean delivery to save the fetus.
A fetus cannot have rights superior to those of a person already born.
Legal Fight Over Caesarean Pits Mother Against Fetus and the Illinois Appellate Court confirmed that the state could not force the woman to have a Caesarean section. The woman's expectation was a miracle.
Winston v. Lee (1985): Surgical Intrusion for Evidence
Watkinson was locking up when approached by a man with a gun. Watkinson drew his own weapon and exchanged gun fire with the man. Shortly after, Lee was found with a gunshot wound and was identified as the shooter by Watkinson. The State wanted to compel Lee to submit to surgery to recover the bullet from his body. Lee sued to enforce his right to refuse the submit to the surgery.
Issue: Does the Fourth Amendment prevent a state from forcing a suspect to undergo surgery to retrieve evidence?
Court held below-the-skin surgery infringed privacy, needing compelling need for the evidence.
Intrusion on Lee's privacy outweighed state interest, surgery would be an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.
Supreme Court barred forced removal of bullet from armed robbery suspect's chest.
Bullet privacy remains even today.
Reasonableness of Bodily Intrusions
Probability of obtaining desired evidence.
How essential is the evidence to a fair determination of the charges?
What is the degree of intrusion of the defendant’s body?
Degree of exigence circumstances.
A search designed to procure evidence from the human body must be reasonable given the facts and circumstances presented.
When minor surgical procedures are to be employed, a court order based on strict necessity must be granted only after an adversary hearing with counsel.
Right to Refuse Medication: Mental Health
Patients involuntarily committed to state psychiatric hospitals cannot be forced to take antipsychotic drugs without a court order.
Court Upholds Forced Treatment Of Mentally Ill by Prison Officials stating that Prison officials can treat mentally ill prisoners with antipsychotic drugs against their will without first receiving permission in a formal judicial hearing.
The Right to Die
There is no federal right, but 10 U.S. states (Maine, New Jersey, Vermont, New Mexico, Montana, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, California, and Hawaii) and Washington, D.C. have enacted ”Death With Dignity” legislation.
Right-To-Die Group Ordered to Pay in Woman's Suicide and was convicted of assisting the suicide of 57-year-old Doreen Dunn.
86-year-old Sentenced to 2 Days in Jail for Assisting Wife's Suicide; he couple had long planned to commit suicide at the end of their lives.
High-Profile Right-to-Die Cases
Karen Ann Quinlan
Terri Schiavo
Nancy Cruzan
Karen Ann Quinlan Case
A judge rejected the plea of parents to take her off the respirator, stating Forcible Feeding
Forcible Feeding of Suffragettes (1913)
Miss Richardson and Miss Peace were forcibly fed and denied bail and accused but not convicted of setting fire to a property, leading to serious illness.
Miss Richardson experienced pain, neuralgia, indigestion, and throat ulcers due to the nasal tube.
Dr. Pearson oversaw the procedure, allegedly taunting Miss Richardson.
Miss Peace initially stopped her hunger strike but resumed after bail denial, believed to be forcibly fed again.
Right to refuse medical care raises questions about:
Individual bodily autonomy
Public health measures
Religious objections to medical treatments (vaccines, blood transfusions).
Considerations for adults and children, whose healthcare decisions often rely on their parents.
Cases for Consideration:
Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905)
In re E.G. (1989)
Winston v. Lee (1985)
Cruzan v. Missouri Department of Health (1990)
Stamford Hospital v. Vega (1996)
Washington v. Glucksberg (1997)
People v. Kevorkian (2001)
Gonzales v. Oregon (2006)
COVID-19 Pandemic and Vaccination
Raises questions about workers' rights to refuse vaccination.
Examples: Bob Nevens fired for not getting vaccinated, colleges firing employees over vaccine mandates.
Nearly 500 L.A. Unified employees were fired for refusing the coronavirus vaccine.
An Orange County fire battalion chief was fired for not reprimanding unvaccinated firefighters.
Growing backlash against vaccine mandates.
Varying state policies: mandates for some workers, bans/blocks on mandates, or no statewide policy.
Religious Objections to Vaccines
Religious exemptions to vaccine mandates.
Example: COVID-19 religious accommodation employee form from Oklahoma, Tulsa pastor signing thousands of vaccine exemption forms.
TRUE HOPE Ministry: Doctrinal stance against intrusions into the human body (masks, COVID tests, vaccines).
Missouri Department of Health: Religious immunization exemption form for school attendance.
Some states offer non-medical exemptions (religious and personal belief) from immunizations within schools.
Religious objections impede mask and vaccine mandates.
Supreme Court knocked down state constraints on indoor worship services during the COVID-19 crisis.
Religious Gatherings During Pandemic
Partisan divide on restricting in-person worship.
Democrats more likely to say in-person services should not be allowed.
Many churches cancelled services, offered parking lot services or drive-thru prayer.
A ruling protects a group of churches during the coronavirus impact.
A church in Chula Vista, CA received over COVID restrictions.
Legal Challenges to Public Health Policy
Court battles over COVID-19 safety measures and recent rulings impact government's ability to keep Americans safe.
A federal judge in Florida struck down the mask mandate for airports and other public transportation methods.
A Florida pastor was arrested after holding church services despite coronavirus orders.
Right to Reject the Rejectors?
Debate on healthcare providers' right to refuse care to unvaccinated patients.
Dr. Valentine in Florida refuses to see unvaccinated COVID-19 patients.
Businesses (Argosy in East Atlanta, Covington pottery business) refuse service to unvaccinated individuals.
There is a simmering divide over who isn't vaccinated, especially in Canada where workers without valid reason for an exemption have until Oct. 30 to be vaccinated
Historical Context: Anti-Vaccination and Smallpox
The Anti-Vaccination Society of America existed in the early 1900s.
Boston experienced a smallpox scare.
State Boards of Health declared vaccination absolutely necessary.
In 1902, about 10,000 were vaccinated in South Boston, Board of Health intended to bring those who refuse into court.
Cambridge reported new smallpox cases, individuals faced charges for not being vaccinated.
Supreme Court upheld vaccination laws in Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905) and Zucht v. King (1922).
Public Health and Individual Rights: Historical Cases
Mary Mallon ("Typhoid Mary"): Asymptomatic carrier of typhoid fever, forcibly quarantined for 26 years.
A Tacoma woman with tuberculosis was found in contempt of court after refusing treatment.
A Tuberculosis Patient Charged in Calif. for not Taking Medication and could be jailed.
New York City to Involuntarily Remove Mentally Ill People From Streets.
Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905) and Pandemic Rights
115-year-old Supreme Court opinion could determine rights during a pandemic.
A US appeals court ruled that Texas could prevent physicians from performing abortions because of the Covid-19 pandemic, leaning heavily on Jacobson v. Massachusetts.
Question: How bluntly might Jacobson v. Massachusetts be wielded to justify curbing individual liberties without caveat?
Faith-Healing and Medical Neglect
Faith-healing parents believe prayer is the only acceptable treatment, even if it means letting their children die.
Boys' Parents Deny Guilt from San Bernardino and were charged in the death of an 11 year old diabetic.
Leader of faith-healing sect, charged in death, dies at 64 and taught that medical care is evil.
Christian Scientist parents have been convicted of involuntary manslaughter/child endangerment for relying on prayer instead of medical treatment.
Government obligations: Enforcing child welfare laws vs. protecting religious freedom when parents choose prayer over medical care.
Courts balance these obligations when such decisions harm the child.
Idaho statute 18-1501 protects practitioners of faith healing.
Nearly every U.S. state offers some level of exemption for parents who withhold medical care to their children on religious grounds, with varying degrees of protection.
MI SUPREME COURT RULING: PARENTS WHO REFUSE MEDICAL TREAT BASED ON RELIGION NOT NEGLIGENT.
PARENTS CHARGED when 2 YEAR OLD DIED FROM PNEUMONIA because RELIGION FORBIDS MEDICAL TREATMENT.
Faith healer parents avoid jail after son, 16, dies in horrible pain after they tried to 'pray away' his burst appendix.
MURDER CHARGES STAND FOR FAITH-HEALING PARENTS after 2 of couple's children have died from pneumonia since 2008.
In re E.G. (1989): Forced Medical Procedures During Pregnancy
Appeals court ruled a pregnant woman, even terminally ill, cannot be forced to undergo a Caesarean delivery to save the fetus.
A fetus cannot have rights superior to those of a person already born.
Legal Fight Over Caesarean Pits Mother Against Fetus and the Illinois Appellate Court confirmed that the state could not force the woman to have a Caesarean section. The woman's expectation was a miracle.
Winston v. Lee (1985): Surgical Intrusion for Evidence
Watkinson was locking up when approached by a man with a gun. Watkinson drew his own weapon and exchanged gun fire with the man. Shortly after, Lee was found with a gunshot wound and was identified as the shooter by Watkinson. The State wanted to compel Lee to submit to surgery to recover the bullet from his body. Lee sued to enforce his right to refuse the submit to the surgery.
Issue: Does the Fourth Amendment prevent a state from forcing a suspect to undergo surgery to retrieve evidence?
Court held below-the-skin surgery infringed privacy, needing compelling need for the evidence.
Intrusion on Lee's privacy outweighed state interest, surgery would be an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.
Supreme Court barred forced removal of bullet from armed robbery suspect's chest.
Bullet privacy remains even today.
Reasonableness of Bodily Intrusions
Probability of obtaining desired evidence.
How essential is the evidence to a fair determination of the charges?
What is the degree of intrusion of the defendant’s body?
Degree of exigence circumstances.
A search designed to procure evidence from the human body must be reasonable given the facts and circumstances presented.
When minor surgical procedures are to be employed, a court order based on strict necessity must be granted only after an adversary hearing with counsel.
Right to Refuse Medication: Mental Health
Patients involuntarily committed to state psychiatric hospitals cannot be forced to take antipsychotic drugs without a court order.
Court Upholds Forced Treatment Of Mentally Ill by Prison Officials stating that Prison officials can treat mentally ill prisoners with antipsychotic drugs against their will without first receiving permission in a formal judicial hearing.
The Right to Die
There is no federal right, but 10 U.S. states (Maine, New Jersey, Vermont, New Mexico, Montana, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, California, and Hawaii) and Washington, D.C. have enacted ”Death With Dignity” legislation.
Right-To-Die Group Ordered to Pay in Woman's Suicide and was convicted of assisting the suicide of 57-year-old Doreen Dunn.
86-year-old Sentenced to 2 Days in Jail for Assisting Wife's Suicide; he couple had long planned to commit suicide at the end of their lives.
High-Profile Right-to-Die Cases
Karen Ann Quinlan
Terri Schiavo
Nancy Cruzan
Karen Ann Quinlan Case
A judge rejected the plea of parents to take her off the respirator, stating Contracts Clause
Contracts Clause
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1:
Restricts states from entering treaties, alliances, or confederations.
Prohibits states from granting letters of marque and reprisal.
States cannot coin money or emit bills of credit.
States can't make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts.
States cannot pass bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, or laws impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant titles of nobility.
Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 44:
"The sacredness of contracts is a fundamental principle in free government; and that, in proportion as the observance of them is extended, will the stability of the [American] Constitution be increased."
Anti-Tenure Law Rejected by North Carolina Supreme Court
In 2016, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled unanimously that state lawmakers violated the constitutional rights of veteran teachers by retroactively stripping them of tenure protections.
In 2013, legislation was pushed through to phase out job protections for all teachers by 2018.
The court ruled that taking tenure away from teachers who had already earned it violated the Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Teachers hired since the law went into effect do not have a route to "career status."
Case: North Carolina Ass'n of Educators, Inc. v. State (2014)
Overview
After the Revolution, many people had difficulty repaying their debts, motivating states to enact laws relieving them of their financial obligations.
This led to infighting among the states and a breakdown of faith in commercial culture nationally.
The drafters of the Constitution sought to preserve faith in contractual relationships as part of constructing a strong national economy.
Historical Context
Early in history, courts used the Contract Clause to vindicate property owners against state abridgment, often in progressive change contexts due to industrialization's social costs and the changing needs of an urban working-class.
Over time, this approach softened to let states enact laws protecting citizens' welfare, even if it retroactively affected previous legal relationships.
A state’s regulation of contracts must be reasonably designed and appropriately tailored to achieve a legitimate public purpose.
Tests for Contract Clause Violations
Longstanding Test (Home Building & Loan Ass’n v. Blaisdell (1934)):
A state may regulate existing private contractual relationships, consistent with the Contract Clause, if the law serves a legitimate public purpose and the “measures taken are reasonable and appropriate to that end.”
Updated Test (Energy Reserves Group v. Kansas Power (1983)):
Whether there is a substantial impairment of a contract.
Whether the state has a significant purpose for the law.
Whether the law is reasonably related to achieving that purpose.
The Clause applies to contracts between private individuals and contracts made by state government.
It is not directed toward the federal government.
Contemporary Contracts Clause Example
Waves of evictions and mass migrations due to economic hardships (economic downturns, war, pandemics, etc.).
Congress and states have responded in various ways to help the suffering public.
1945 Trade Rent Law Example
In 1945, the constitutionality of the Commercial Rent Control Law as applied retroactively to New York City loft leases made before the Legislature enacted the statute was upheld in a 6-to-1 decision by the Court of Appeals.
The law, enacted in March as an emergency measure, limited commercial rents to the level of March 1, 1943, plus 15 percent and applied to all loft leases regardless of when signed.
Counsel argued the law violated due process and equal protection, and Article 1, Section 10 of the Federal Constitution which prohibits a State from enacting a law which Impairs the obligations of contracts.
Contemporary Example: Great Recession and COVID-19 Pandemic
During the Great Recession of 2008, eviction rates rose significantly due to property foreclosures when the “housing bubble” burst.
In May 2009, the federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act was passed, requiring new owners to provide at least 90 days’ notice to vacate and to honor the terms of any existing leases.
During the COVID pandemic, mass job loss and unemployment led to fears of mass evictions as tenants became unable to pay rent. As many as 20 percent of renters were at risk for eviction by the end of September 2020.
State legislators and Congress responded with actions to help people during this unprecedented time with unemployment, housing and food insecurity, and preventative health care.
“Contracts Clause” issues had to be addressed in each instance of state action (Federal action had different constraints).
Eviction Moratorium Cases
Apartment Ass'n of Los Angeles County v. City of Los Angeles (2021):
The Ninth Circuit upheld a city eviction moratorium against a contracts clause challenge.
The law was reasonable and appropriate and did not constitute retroactive deprivation of vested rights.
Cited Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell (1934).
Also cited Sveen v. Melin (2018) which adopted a two-step test:
Whether the law imposes a
Abortion, Reproductive Rights, Morality and Bodily Autonomy
Criminalization of Birth Control Information
Illinois (1827):
Section 46 of Illinois law criminalized administering or causing the administration of any poison or noxious substance to a pregnant woman with the intent to cause a miscarriage. Violators faced imprisonment up to three years and a fine up to .
Historical Context: Abortion Cases and Regulations
1954: Raid on a "plush abortion mill" in Virginia, highlighting the criminalization of abortion and the risks associated with illegal procedures.
Police arrested seven individuals, including Dr. G. Thomas Strother, and discovered in cash, suggesting a lucrative illegal operation.
1960: Murder charge filed against Mae Etta Scott for causing the death of a woman during an abortion, demonstrating the severe legal consequences.
Wisconsin Abortion Case: Dr. Alfred L. Kennan and his staff were charged under the state abortion law, leading to protests and a preliminary hearing.
State Abortion Bans
A map illustrates the varying degrees of state abortion bans, ranging from full bans to restrictions at different gestational periods (six weeks, 12 weeks, 15-18 weeks).
Introduction to Reproductive Rights
Historical Context: States historically regulated human sexuality in ways now considered abhorrent.
Lecture Focus: Examination of laws regulating reproductive rights, efforts to change them, and ongoing threats.
Lecture Outline
Criminalization of Birth Control Information
Eugenics and Forced Sterilization Laws
Abortion Regulations
Fetal Protection Laws
Reproductive Freedom for Prisoners
Cases in This Unit
People v. Byrne (1917)
Buck v Bell (1927)
Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942)
Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972)
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Maher v. Roe (1977)
Planned Parenthood of Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992)
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016)
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022)
Gerber v. Hickman (2002)
Criminalization of Birth Control Information
Comstock Act: Criminalized the publication, distribution, and possession of information, devices, or medications related to “unlawful” abortion or contraception.
Penalties for Violating the Comstock Act
Conviction could result in up to five years of imprisonment with hard labor and a fine of up to .4001.6M33K in Woman's Suicide and was convicted of assisting the suicide of 57-year-old Doreen Dunn.: Some actions can lead to significant financial repercussions
86-year-old Sentenced to 2 Days in Jail for Assisting Wife's Suicide; he couple had long planned to commit suicide at the end of their lives.: Some actions have seen some sentencing for elderly trying to follow their life plans
High-Profile Right-to-Die Cases
Karen Ann Quinlan
Terri Schiavo
Nancy Cruzan
Karen Ann Quinlan Case
A judge rejected the plea of parents to take her off the respirator, stating Contracts Clause
Contracts Clause
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1:
Restricts states from entering treaties, alliances, or confederations.
States cannot coin money or emit bills of credit.
States can't make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts.
States cannot pass bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, or laws impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant titles of nobility.
Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 44:
"The sacredness of contracts is a fundamental principle in free government; and that, in proportion as the observance of them is extended, will the stability of the [American] Constitution be increased."
Anti-Tenure Law Rejected by North Carolina Supreme Court
In 2016, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled unanimously that state lawmakers violated the constitutional rights of veteran teachers by retroactively stripping them of tenure protections: Courts will defend the contractual rights between individuals
In 2013, legislation was pushed through to phase out job protections for all teachers by 2018.
Teachers hired since the law went into effect do not have a route to "career status."
Case: North Carolina Ass'n of Educators, Inc. v. State (2014)
Overview
After the Revolution, many people had difficulty repaying their debts, motivating states to enact laws relieving them of their financial obligations.
This led to infighting among the states and a breakdown of faith in commercial culture nationally.
The drafters of the Constitution sought to preserve faith in contractual relationships as part of constructing a strong national economy.
Historical Context
Early in history, courts used the Contract Clause to vindicate property owners against state abridgment, often in progressive change contexts due to industrialization's social costs and the changing needs of an urban working-class.
Over time, this approach softened to let states enact laws protecting citizens' welfare, even if it retroactively affected previous legal relationships.
A state’s regulation of contracts must be reasonably designed and appropriately tailored to achieve a legitimate public purpose.
Tests for Contract Clause Violations
Longstanding Test (Home Building & Loan Ass’n v. Blaisdell (1934)) A state may regulate existing private contractual relationships, consistent with the Contract Clause, if the law serves a legitimate public purpose and the “measures taken are reasonable and appropriate to that end.”
Tests for Contract Clause Violations
Updated Test (Energy Reserves Group v. Kansas Power (1983)):
Whether there is a substantial impairment of a contract.
Whether the state has a significant purpose for the law.
Whether the law is reasonably related to achieving that purpose.
The Clause applies to contracts between private individuals and contracts made by state government.
It is not directed toward the federal government.
Contemporary Contracts Clause Example
Waves of evictions and mass migrations due to economic hardships (economic downturns, war, pandemics, etc.).
Congress and states have responded in various ways to help the suffering public.
1945 Trade Rent Law Example
In 1945, the constitutionality of the Commercial Rent Control Law as applied retroactively to New York City loft leases made before the Legislature enacted the statute was upheld in a 6-to-1 decision by the Court of Appeals.
The law, enacted in March as an emergency measure, limited commercial rents to the level of March 1, 1943, plus 15 percent and applied to all loft leases regardless of when signed.
Counsel argued the law violated due process and equal protection, and Article 1, Section 10 of the Federal Constitution which prohibits a State from enacting a law which Impairs the obligations of contracts.
Contemporary Example: Great Recession and COVID-19 Pandemic
During the Great Recession of 2008, eviction rates rose significantly due to property foreclosures when the “housing bubble” burst.
During the COVID pandemic, mass job loss and unemployment led to fears of mass evictions as tenants became unable to pay rent. As many as 20 percent of renters were at risk for eviction by the end of September 2020.
State legislators and Congress responded with actions to help people during this unprecedented time with unemployment, housing and food insecurity, and preventative health care.
“Contracts Clause” issues had to be addressed in each instance of state action (Federal action had different constraints).
Eviction Moratorium Cases
Apartment Ass'n of Los Angeles County v. City of Los Angeles (2021):
The Ninth Circuit upheld a city eviction moratorium against a contracts clause challenge.
The law was reasonable and appropriate and did not constitute retroactive deprivation of vested rights.
Cited Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell (1934).
Also cited Sveen v. Melin (2018) which adopted a two-step test:
Whether the law imposes a
Abortion, Reproductive Rights, Morality and Bodily Autonomy
Criminalization of Birth Control Information
Illinois (1827):
Section 46 of Illinois law criminalized administering or causing the administration of any poison or noxious substance to a pregnant woman with the intent to cause a miscarriage. Violators faced imprisonment up to three years and a fine up to 1,0005,6002,000400$$ for bail, with the remainder donated to the Parents' Aid Society Clinic.
SPPARENTS'AID SOCIETY, inc.
Bill Baird-Director-130 Main St, Heapstead, NY (JET-2626. POORMATION. CONNICAL
Discussed in relation to Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972).
**Eugenics and Forced Sterilization