CA Bar Exam 練習答案: Constitutional Law (Feb 2004)

Bar Review Course作成のEssay答案は完璧すぎ&長すぎて参考にならないという方向けに、過去に書きためた答案を公開していきます。公開するのは、私が実際に1時間計って解いた答案を、ギリギリ合格ラインまたは合格ライン少し上になるように手直ししたものです。手直しにあたっては某Bar Review Courseの採点表を参照しています (あくまで自己採点です)。

問題文

Feb 2004 Question 5
https://nwculaw.edu/pdf/bar/February%202004%20Essays%20and%20Sample%20Answers.pdf

The National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration (NHTSA), a federal agency, after appropriate hearings and investigation, made the following finding of fact: “The NHTSA finds that, while motor vehicle radar detectors have some beneficial purpose in keeping drivers alert to the speed of their vehicles, most are used to avoid highway speed-control traps and lawful apprehension by law enforcement officials for violations of
speed-control laws.” On the basis of this finding, the NHTSA promulgated regulations banning the use of radar detectors in trucks with a gross weight of five tons or more on all roads and highways within the United States.

State X subsequently enacted a statute prohibiting the use of radar detectors in any motor vehicle on any road or highway within State X. The State X Highway Department (Department) enforces the statute.

The American Car Association (ACA) is an association comprised of automobile motorists residing throughout the United States. One of ACA’s purposes is to promote free and unimpeded automobile travel. ACA has received numerous complaints about the State X statute from its members who drive vehicles there.

In response to such complaints, ACA has filed suit against the Department in federal district court in State X, seeking a declaration that the State X statute is invalid under the Commerce Clause and the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. The Department has moved to dismiss ACA’s complaint on the ground that ACA lacks standing.

1. How should the court rule on the Department’s motion to dismiss on the ground of ACA’s lack of standing? Discuss.
2. On the assumption that ACA has standing, how should the court decide ACA’s claim that the State X statute is invalid under the Commerce Clause and the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution? Discuss.

答案

note掲載_Con Law_2004Feb_1

ここから先は

1,807字 / 2画像
この記事のみ ¥ 350
期間限定 PayPay支払いすると抽選でお得に!

California Bar Exam 受験生を全力で応援しています!