处理后的mbe宪法题库刷题格式(含解析).txt

更新时间：试题数量：购买人数：提供作者：

有效期：个月

章节介绍：共有个章节

收藏

我的练习

我的错题
(0道)

我的收藏
(0道)

我的斩题
(0道)

我的笔记
(0道)

专项练习

顺序练习 练习进度 0 / 0

随机练习 自定义设置练习量

模拟考试 仿真模拟

题型练习 按题型分类练习

易错题 精选高频易错题

学习资料 考试学习相关信息

搜索

题库预览

A state requires all corporations that operate in the state to file their annual income tax returns with the state's tax board for the purpose of calculating the amount of income tax that each corporation owes. The board requires corporations to provide reasonable approximations of their income earned on a worldwide basis. The board then calculates the income tax that a corporation owes based on the amount of income attributable to its operations within the state. Several foreign corporations that operate in the state and do not use the state's method of accounting have sued the board in state court, arguing that the state tax is unconstitutional. Is the state tax constitutional?

A state owned and operated an electric power system, which included a nuclear power plant. In order to ensure the availability of sites for the disposal of spent fuel from the nuclear power plant, the state refused to supply electric power to out-of-state purchasers residing in states that would not accept spent fuel from the plant for storage or disposal. Assume that no federal statute applies. Which of the following is the strongest argument that the state's action is constitutional?

A state law requires any lawn mower sold in the state to meet a specified minimum level of fuel efficiency. A new federal statute requires all power equipment, including lawn mowers, to be labeled with energy efficiency stickers to permit purchasers to make informed choices when buying such equipment. The statute does not expressly preempt state law. Assume that no other federal statute or administrative regulation addresses the energy efficiency of power equipment. Which of the following is the best argument the state can make for the continued validity of its law?

A plaintiff has sued a defendant in a court of the state in which both parties reside. The plaintiff alleges only a cause of action arising under a federal statute, although state law provides a similar cause of action. The federal statute provides that claims under the statute can be brought in any court of competent jurisdiction. The statute has not yet been interpreted by any federal court. Should the state court hear the case?

A city in State X is a center for businesses that assemble personal computers. Components for these computers are manufactured elsewhere in State X and in other states, then shipped to the city, where the computers are assembled. A city ordinance imposes a special license tax on all of the many companies engaged in the business of assembling computers in that city. The tax payable by each such company is a percentage of the company's gross receipts earned in the state. A State X statute that authorizes municipalities to impose this license tax has a "State X content" provision. To comply with this provision of the state statute, the city license tax ordinance provides that the tax paid by any assembler of computers subject to this tax ordinance will be reduced by a percentage equal to the proportion of computer components manufactured in State X. A company assembles computers in the city and sells them from its offices in the city to buyers throughout the United States. All of the components of its computers come from outside State X. Therefore, the company must pay the city license tax in full without receiving any refund. Other computer assemblers in the city use components manufactured in State X in varying proportions and, therefore, are entitled to partial reductions of their city license tax payments. Following prescribed procedure, the company brings an action in a proper court asking to have the city's special license tax declared unconstitutional on the ground that it is inconsistent with the negative implications of the commerce clause. In this case, should the court rule in favor of the company?

A fatal virus recently infected poultry in several nations. Some scientific evidence indicates that the virus can be transmitted from poultry to humans. Poultry farming is a major industry in several U.S. states. In one such state, the legislature has enacted a law imposing a fee of two cents per bird on all poultry farming and processing operations in the state. The purpose of the fee is to pay for a state inspection system to ensure that no poultry raised or processed in the state is infected with the virus. A company that has poultry processing plants both in the state and in other states has sued to challenge the fee. Is the fee constitutional?

State A sent three of its employees to a city located in State B to consult with a chemical laboratory there about matters of state business. While in the course of their employment, the three State A employees negligently released into local State B waterways some of the chemical samples they had received from the laboratory in State B. Persons in State B injured by the release of the chemicals sued the three State A employees and State A in a State B court for the damages they suffered. After a trial in which all of the defendants admitted jurisdiction of the State B court and fully participated, the plaintiffs received a judgment against all of the defendants for 5 million, which became final. Subsequently, the plaintiffs sought to enforce their State B court judgment by commencing a proper proceeding in an appropriate State A court. In that enforcement proceeding, State A argued, as it had done unsuccessfully in the earlier action in the State B court, that its liability is limited by a State A law to 100,000 in any tort case. Because the three individual employees of State A are able to pay only 50,000 of the judgment, the only way the plaintiffs can fully satisfy their State B court judgment is from the funds of State A. Can the plaintiffs recover the full balance of their State B court judgment from State A in the enforcement proceeding they filed in the State A court?

A state statute provides that only corporations whose owners have been residents of the state for at least two years may obtain a retail license to sell liquor in the state. The stated purpose of the statute is to promote responsible alcohol sales and consumption through the local control of retail liquor stores. A corporation's application for a liquor store license was denied because its owners had been state residents for less than two years. The corporation has sued to challenge the statute. Is the state statute constitutional?

A state legislature conducted an investigation into a series of fatal accidents in the state involving commercial trucks with exteriors made of polished aluminum. The investigation revealed that the sun's glare reflecting off these trucks blinded the drivers of other vehicles. In response, the state's legislature enacted a law prohibiting commercial trucks with polished aluminum exteriors from traveling on the state's highways. Litigation over the state law resulted in a final decision by the United States Supreme Court that the law impermissibly burdened interstate commerce and therefore was unconstitutional. Congress later enacted a statute permitting any state to enact a law regulating the degree of light reflectiveness of the exteriors of commercial trucks using the state's highways. Is this federal statute constitutional?

A man bought an antique car from a car dealer in State A. Under State A law, a person who buys from such a dealer acquires good title, even if the property was stolen from a previous owner. The man showed the car at an antique car show in State B. A woman recognized the car as having been stolen from her. Under State B law, a person whose property is stolen may reclaim it, even if the current possessor is an innocent purchaser. The woman sued the man in a State B court to reclaim the car. In his defense, the man claimed that he had good title under the law of State A. Nevertheless, the State B court applied State B law, and the woman prevailed. The man did not appeal. The sheriff had the car returned to State B and gave the woman possession of the car. Several months later, the woman moved to State A, bringing the car with her. The man brought a new suit against the woman in a State A court, claiming that the State B court in the prior suit should have applied the State A law, which protects innocent purchasers. The woman appeared and moved to dismiss the suit. What should the State A court do?

Congress enacted a federal statute providing that any state may "require labeling to show the state or other geographic origin of citrus fruit that is imported into the receiving state." Pursuant to the federal statute, a state that produced large quantities of citrus fruit enacted a law requiring all citrus fruit imported into the state to be stamped with a two-letter postal abbreviation signifying the state of the fruit's origin. The law did not impose any such requirement for citrus fruit grown within the state. When it adopted the law, the state legislature declared that its purpose was to reduce the risks of infection of local citrus crops by itinerant diseases that have been found to attack citrus fruit. A national association of citrus growers has sued to have the state law declared unconstitutional. The association claims that the law is prohibited by the negative implications of the commerce clause of the Constitution. Which of the following is the best argument in favor of the state's effort to have this lawsuit dismissed?

After several well-publicized deaths caused by fires in products made from highly flammable fabrics, State A enacted a statute prohibiting "the manufacture or assembly of any product in this state which contains any fabric that has not been tested and approved for flame retardancy by a specific privately owned and operated testing company located in State A." For many years, a fabric mill located in State A has had its fabric tested for flame retardancy by a privately owned and operated testing company located in State A. This testing company is a reliable organization that uses a process for testing and approving fabrics for flame retardancy identical in all respects to that used by the State A testing company. Because the fabric mill wishes to continue to have its fabric tested solely by the State B testing company, the fabric mill files an action in a State A court challenging the constitutionality of the State A statute as applied to its circumstances. In this suit, should the court hold the statute to be constitutional?

A state owned a large natural gas field and took bids for its exploitation. The highest bid came from an interstate pipeline company that distributed natural gas to providers throughout the country. A local gas company submitted the next highest bid, which included the commitment that it would pass along to local customers any savings if it was awarded the contract. The state awarded the contract to the local company. The interstate company sued to overturn this decision. Should the interstate company prevail?

A state law prohibits the withdrawal of groundwater from any well within the state for use in another state. The express purpose of the law is to safeguard the supply of water for state citizens. Adoption of this state law followed enactment of a federal statute providing that "the transport of groundwater from one state to another may be restricted or prohibited in accordance with the laws of the state in which the water originates." An association of water users in a neighboring state has filed suit to have the state law declared unconstitutional and enjoined on the ground that it violates the negative implications of the commerce clause. Which of the following is the best argument supporting a motion to dismiss the lawsuit?

The childhood home of a former U.S. president is part of a national park located in a city. The National Park Service entered into a contract with an independent antique collector to acquire items owned by residents of the city during the former president's lifetime. According to the contract, the collector purchases items and then sells them to the Park Service at a price equal to the collector's cost plus a 10% commission. Purchases by antique collectors are ordinarily subject to the sales tax of the state in which the city is located. The collector has filed suit in state court to enjoin collection of the tax on these purchases for the Park Service, claiming that the sales tax is unconstitutional as applied to them. Should the state court issue the injunction?

In response to massive layoffs of employees of automobile assembly plants located in State A, the state legislature enacted a statute which prohibits the parking of automobiles manufactured outside of the United States in any parking lot or parking structure located within State

A man contracted with a moving company to ship household goods from the man's old home in State A to his new home in State B. A federal statute provides that all liability of an interstate mover to a shipper for loss of or damage to the shipper's goods in transit is governed exclusively by the contract between them. The statute also requires the mover to offer a shipper at least two contracts with different levels of liability. In full compliance with that federal statute, the moving company offered the man a choice between two shipping agreements that provided different levels of liability on the part of the moving company. The more expensive contract provided that the moving company was fully liable in case of loss or damage. The less expensive contract limited the moving company's liability in case of loss or damage to less than full value. The man voluntarily signed the less expensive contract, fixing the moving company's liability at less than the full value of the shipment. The moving company's truck was involved in an accident in State B. The accident was entirely a product of the negligence of the moving company's driver. The man's household goods were destroyed. In accordance with the contract, the moving company reimbursed the man for less than the full value of the goods. The man then brought suit against the moving company under the tort law of State B claiming that he was entitled to be reimbursed for the full value of the destroyed goods. The moving company filed a motion to dismiss. In this suit, what action should the court take?

A federal statute provides that the cities in which certain specified airports are located may regulate the rates and services of all limousines that serve those airports, without regard to the origin or destination of the passengers who use the limousines. A city in State A is located adjacent to a city in State B. The airport serving both of them is located in the State A city and is one of those airports specified in the federal statute. The State A city council has adopted a rule that requires any limousines serving the airport to charge only the rates authorized by the State A city council. An airline limousine service has a lucrative business transporting passengers between the State B city and the airport in the State A city, at much lower rates than those required by the State A city council. It transports passengers in interstate traffic only; it does not provide local service within the State A city. The new rule adopted by the State A city council will require the limousine service to charge the same rates as limousines operating only in the State A city. Must the airline limousine service comply with the new rule of the State A city council?

The United States Department of the Interior granted a man the food and drink concession in a federal park located in a state. The man operated his concession out of federally owned facilities in the park. The federal statute authorizing the Interior Department to grant such concessions provided that the grantees would pay only a nominal rental for use of these federal facilities because of the great benefit their concessions would provide to the people of the United States. The state legislature enacted a statute imposing an occupancy tax on the occupants of real estate within that state that is not subject to state real estate taxes. The statute was intended to equalize the state tax burden on such occupants with that on people occupying real estate that is subject to state real estate taxes. Pursuant to that statute, the state's Department of Revenue attempted to collect the state occupancy tax from the man because the federal facilities occupied by the man were not subject to state real estate taxes. The man sued to invalidate the state occupancy tax as applied to him. What is the strongest constitutional ground upon which the man could challenge the occupancy tax?

A state spends several million dollars a year on an oyster conservation program. As part of that program, the state limits, by statute, oyster fishing in its coastal waters to persons who have state oyster permits. In order to promote conservation, it issues only a limited number of oyster permits each year. The permits are effective for only one year from the date of their issuance and are awarded on the basis of a lottery, in which there is no differentiation between resident and nonresident applicants. However, each nonresident who obtains a permit is charged an annual permit fee that is $5 more than the fee charged residents. A large fishing company operates from a port in another state and is incorporated in that other state. Each of the company's boats has a federal shipping license that permits it "to engage in all aspects of the coastal trade, to fish and to carry cargo from place to place along the coast, and to engage in other lawful activities along the coast of the United States." These shipping licenses are authorized by federal statute. Assume no other federal statutes or administrative rules apply. Although it had previously held a state oyster permit, the company did not obtain a permit in that state's lottery this year. Which of the following is the strongest argument that can be made in support of a continued right of the company to fish for oysters this year in the state's coastal waters?