Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
2. The provision authorizing direct review of the constitutionality, interpretation, or application of this statute only in the United States Supreme Court is
The National AIDS Prevention and Control Act is a new, comprehensive federal statute that was enacted to deal with the public health crisis caused by HIV/AIDS. Congress and the President were concerned that inconsistent lower court rulings with respect to the constitutionality, interpretation, and application of the statute might adversely affect or delay its enforcement and, thereby, jeopardize the public health. As a result, they included a provision in the statute providing that all legal challenges concerning those matters may be initiated only by filing suit directly in the United States Supreme Court.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
Under Article I, Section 8, Congress does have the right to «lay and collect taxes. .. to pay the debts and provide for the. .. general welfare of the United States. . .» But the phrase «provide for the. .. general welfare» in this sentence modifies «lay and collect taxes. .. to pay the debts. . .» Therefore, Congress may spend for the general welfare, it may tax for the general welfare, but it may not regulate for the general welfare. See U.S. v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936).
D is correct. Article III provides that the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases involving ambassadors, ministers and consuls, and cases in which a state is a party. This provision, however, would impermissibly expand the scope of that limited original jurisdiction.
A is incorrect. Although the Necessary and Proper Clause does not allow Congress to regulate for the general welfare, it permits the enactment of laws that serve the general welfare. Nevertheless, the provision still impermissibly seeks to expand the Court's original jurisdiction as established by Article III.
B is incorrect. This is an incorrect statement of the law. Article III only allows Congress to make exceptions and regulations regarding the Court's appellate jurisdiction, not its original jurisdiction.
C is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with the wrong reasoning. Although the provision is unconstitutional, it is not because it denies people bringing challenges equal protection. It does not treat or classify certain groups of individuals differently. Rather, as explained above, it is unconstitutional because it runs afoul of the Court's original jurisdiction as established in Article III.