13. In a suit by a federal taxpayer to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, the court should

A federal statute appropriated $7 million for a nationwide essay contest on «How the United States Can Best Stop Drug Abuse.» The statute indicates that its purpose is to generate new, practical ideas for eliminating drug abuse in the United States. Contest rules set forth in the statute provide that winning essays are to be selected on the basis of the «originality, aptness, and feasibility of their ideas.» The statute expressly authorizes a first prize of $1 million, 50 second prizes of $100,000 each, and 100 third prizes of $10,000 each. It also states that judges for the contest are to be appointed by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate, and that all residents of the United States who are not employees of the federal government are eligible to enter and win the contest. A provision of the statute authorizes any taxpayer of the United States to challenge its constitutionality.

Refuse to decide its merits, because the suit involves policy questions that are inherently political and, therefore, nonjusticiable
Hold the statute unconstitutional, because it does not provide sufficient guidelines for awarding the prize money appropriated by Congress and, therefore, unconstitutionally delegates legislative power to the contest judges
Hold the statute unconstitutional, because its relationship to legitimate purposes of the spending power of Congress is too tenuous and conjectural to satisfy the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I
Hold the statute constitutional, because it is reasonably related to the general welfare, it states concrete objectives, and it provides adequate criteria for conducting the essay contest and awarding the prize money

« PreviousSkipNext »

Show clarification Download PDF

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). Congressional spending may be for any public purpose, not merely the accomplishment of other enumerated powers.

Congress's delegation of legislative authority is an implied power that will be constitutional if Congress offers an «intelligible principle» to help guide the executive branch. See J. W. Hampton, Jr. Co. v. United States, 276 U.S. 394 (1928). In other words, Congress can delegate its powers to an entity within the executive branch through a statute as long as it gives that entity sufficient guidance on how to exercise that power.

The Constitution grants Congress a number of specific powers, many of which are enumerated in Article I, Section 8. It also grants Congress auxiliary power under the Necessary and Proper Clause. This Clause gives Congress the power to make all laws necessary and proper (i.e., appropriate) for carrying into execution any power granted to any branch of the federal government. Congress may not, however, adopt a law that is expressly prohibited by another provision of the Constitution.

Thus, so long as the means are rationally related to a constitutionally-specified object, the means are also constitutional (assuming it does not violate any specific prohibition).

The U.S. Supreme Court will not decide political questions. Political questions are those issues committed by the Constitution to another branch of government; or those inherently incapable of resolution and enforcement by the judicial process.

D is correct. The court should find the statute constitutional as a proper exercise of the congressional spending power. Although Congress is not permitted to regulate for the general welfare directly through legislation, it nevertheless has broad power to spend in service of the general welfare. This statute is a spending measure for the public purpose of combating drug abuse in the U.S., which is a concrete objective, and has criteria for conducting the essay contest and awarding the prize money, including input into the makeup of the decision-makers. Therefore, the statute is neither beyond Congress's spending power, nor is it an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority.

A is incorrect. This case does not present a non-justiciable political question, which would involve the adjudication of an issue that has been designated to another branch of government. On the contrary, the statute was passed by Congress pursuant to its spending power and delegates the appointment of contest judges to the President and the Senate, along with clear guidelines for prizes.

B is incorrect. Although the essay contest guidelines are broad, they supply sufficient guidance to the judges, including the requirement that the winning essays should be selected on the basis of the «originality, aptness, and feasibility of their ideas.» The judges, appointed by the executive branch with the advice and consent of the Senate, thus have «intelligible principles» on which to spend the appropriated prize money.

C is incorrect. The statute is, in fact, constitutional under the Necessary and Proper Clause as it is rationally related to a constitutionally-specified and legitimate objective: combating drug abuse in the U.S. It is not too tenuous or conjectural to satisfy this Clause, for the reasons stated above.

Comments (0)

There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it

13. In a suit by a federal taxpayer to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, the court should

Comments (0)

Trial period expired