We've found 9 Substantive Due Process tests

Applied Philosophy Federal And State Long Term Care Insurance Physical Therapist Assistant Substantive Due Process
Jurisprudence AZ Law – Flashcards 49 terms
Joseph Fraser avatar
Joseph Fraser
49 terms
AP Government Constitutional Law Due Process Clause Equal Protection Clause Substantive Due Process
7.5.2Test (CST): Civil Liberties and Civil Rights – Flashcards 30 terms
Joan Grant avatar
Joan Grant
30 terms
Bargained For Exchange Full Faith And Credit Full Faith And Credit Clause Legal Management Strict Product Liability Substantive Due Process Taxing And Spending True False Questions
Bus Law 12a Ch 4, 5, 6, 7 T/F – Flashcards 50 terms
Ember Wagner avatar
Ember Wagner
50 terms
AP Government AP United States Government And Politics Constitutional Law Free Exercise Clause Substantive Due Process
AP Gov Chapter 16 Vocab – Flashcards 18 terms
Kenneth McQuaid avatar
Kenneth McQuaid
18 terms
Constitutional Law Politics of the United States Substantive Due Process
Business Law Ch 5 – Flashcards 19 terms
Sarah Adrian avatar
Sarah Adrian
19 terms
Business Law Substantive Due Process Usa Patriot Act
Bus Law Final – Flashcards 106 terms
Marlon Riddle avatar
Marlon Riddle
106 terms
Business Law Business Management Substantive Due Process Uniform Commercial Code United States Supreme Court
Business Law Final Test Questions – Flashcards 120 terms
Clarence Louder avatar
Clarence Louder
120 terms
AP Government Due Process Clause Rational Basis Test Substantive Due Process
AP Government Cases for College Board Final 12 terms
Roy Johnson avatar
Roy Johnson
12 terms
Business Law Constitutional Law Professions School Psychology Substantive Due Process
Teacher Dismissal – Flashcards 48 terms
Richard Lattimore avatar
Richard Lattimore
48 terms
Plum was entering the United States from a trip abroad when the Customs Service confiscated some goods she had purchased and brought back with her. The determination of whether the government is attempting to take property and what type of hearing the Customs Service must offer Plum, is an analysis of: a. substantive due process. b. the Takings Clause. c. procedural due process. d. eminent domain.
c. procedural due process.
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/blaw-ch-5/
10 Substantive due process limits what the government can do in its legislative and executive capacities.
West Virginia passed a statute regulating working conditions in its mines. If the statute is challenged in court on substantive due process grounds: a. it would be presumed invalid but would be struck down only if it is not necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. b. it would be presumed valid since it regulates economic or social conditions. c. it would be void because it involves a fundamental right to work. d. it carries no weight.
b. it would be presumed valid since it regulates economic or social conditions.
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/blaw-ch-5/
Substantive Due Process BMW v Gore; facts? Issue? Court’s opinion?
A part of the due process clause, but separate from the takings clause and procedural due process. The substance of any law or government action may be challenged on fundamental fairness grounds, meaning you’re challenging the fact that you believe you have a right that’s so fundamental the govt can’t take it at all. facts: This case limited punitive damages under the due process clause of the 14th amendment (so I know it had to do w/ state or local govt). Gore (plaintiff) bought BMW, discovered it was repainted before he bought it. BMW’s policy was to sell damaged cars as new if there was a super small, inexpensive amt of damage. Gore sued, & got 4k in compensatory damages, & 4M in punitive damages, based on BMW’s behavior over a while to a ton of unsuspecting customers. Issue: do super high punitive damages like this violate the Due Process clause of constitution? Court’s Opinion: found that excessively high punitive damages DO violate due process clause, bc the punitive damages were “grossly excessive”. If punitive damages are “grossly excessive”, then they violate the substantive due process clause. AKA, a 3-pronged test was used to determine if the punitive damages were grossly excessive: 1) the degree of reprehensibility (how reprehensible was the act?) 2) the disparity (difference) bw the harm & potential harm 3) the amt of the punitive damage award & how big/small this is compared to similar cases the Court found that BMW’s conduct was NOT particularly reprehensible (no reckless disregard for health or safety, nor even evidence of bad faith). The ratio of actual or potential damages to punitive damages was suspiciously high (4k vs 4M lmao). Finally, the criminal sanctions available for similar conduct were limited to $2,000, making the $2 million assessment the equivalent of a severe criminal penalty. However, The court noted that Punitive damages may be imposed to further a state’s legitimate interest in punishing unlawful conduct and deterring the risk of it happening again as long as they are not “grossly excessive.”
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/blaw-week-12/
Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New