QUESTION I (sixty minutes)
Suggested time: 1:00-2:00
In 1988, Congress enacted the Equity in the Courts Act ("the Act"). Congress' main purpose in
passing the Act was to ensure parity between the state and federal judicial systems. Congress
heard testimony that state courts are simply not equal to federal courts in their ability and
willingness to protect constitutional rights.
The Act's main feature is the creation of a Judicial Equity Commission ("the Commission"),
comprising eight members drawn from all three branches of the federal government. The
Commission's members serve three-year terms. The President appoints three members with the
advice and consent of the Senate. The Chief Justice designates four federal judges to serve on the
Commission. The Commission's eighth member is a member of Congress selected by the Speaker
of the House. The Commission member drawn from Congress acts in an advisory capacity only;
that member has no authority to vote on any matters addressed by the Commission. A
Commission member is removable before expiration of his or her term only by impeachment.
The Act authorizes the Commission to study the administration of justice within the state and
federal court systems and to adopt any regulations necessary to ensure that constitutional rights
are adequately protected in the courts. The Act requires the Legal Services Corporation to
withhold federal funds for legal services to indigent persons from any state that does not comply
with any regulation the Commission adopts.
After substantial investigation, the Commission in 1989 promulgated a far-reaching regulation
("the Regulation"). The Commission decided that state judicial systems are not equal to the
federal system in protecting constitutional rights because state court judges in most states are not
sufficiently insulated from political pressures. The Commission found that state court judges in 42
states must stand for election every so many years. The Regulation thus requires each state to
provide life tenure (subject to whatever removal-for-cause system the state might have) to all
state court judges taking office after June 1, 1990.
The State of Misery faces loss of federal funding for its program to provide legal services to
indigent persons because Misery adamantly refuses to change its judicial system as required by the
Regulation. Misery has just filed suit in federal court against the Commission and the Legal
Services Corporation. Please discuss fully all constitutional issues arising from this suit.
QUESTION III (forty minutes)
Suggested time: 2:50-3:30
Falwell's legislature responded to its "gambling crisis" by enacting a statute to discourage
Falwellians from participating in Babylonia's lottery. While providing a credit to Falwell residents
for any income tax paid on gambling winnings to an outside state and to the federal government,
Falwell's statute requires its citizens to deposit the entire amount of any gambling winnings into
the state's road repair fund.
Based upon this scheme, Lucky Strike has been ordered to pay into the road repair fund his entire
two million dollar windfall (minus the applicable federal income tax--Babylonia has no state
income tax, sales tax, or other tax applicable to gambling winnings). Since Lucky has received
only vouchers and not cash from Babylonia, Lucky has refused to contribute anything to Falwell's
road repair fund. Falwell's Director of Finance sues in Falwell state court to recover Lucky's
after-tax windfall. Please discuss all constitutional issues raised by the Director's suit.
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR TEST NUMBER IS ON EACH BLUEBOOK, AND HAND IN
YOUR EXAM (UNFOLDED) AND BLUEBOOKS.
GOOD LUCK IN THE REST OF YOUR EXAMS, AND HAVE A NICE VACATION!