1.Question :TCO B. After the 2010 fall election, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) decides to take matters into its own hands. During the lame duck session, they pass a new "Elections Are Free Act" that requires single people who make more than $75,000/year or married couples who make more than $150,000/year to provide a copy of their tax return to their local county officials before being allowed to register to vote. The return must prove that they have paid at least 15% of their total income in taxes or they are not allowed to register to vote. List two bases under which someone impacted by this law could argue to have the law overturned.
Student Answer: 1)For this case I see this is unconstitutional. There are violation of the First Amendment discrimination and unlawful poll tax. An example can be this same scenario of Harper v. Virginia. These are suits by Virginia residents to have declared unconstitutional Virginia's poll tax. The right to vote in federal elections is conferred by Art. I, § 2, of the Constitution (United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 314-315), the right to vote in state elections is nowhere expressly mentioned. It is argued that the right to vote in state elections is implicit, particularly by reason of the First Amendment, and that it may not constitutionally be conditioned upon the payment of a tax or fee. 2)A State violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth nor to paying or not paying this or any other tax. This restrains the States from fixing voter qualifications which invidiously discriminate. An example is the Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370, the Court referred to "the political franchise of voting" as a "fundamental political right, because preservative of all rights.They conclude that "A citizen, a qualified voter, is no more nor no less so because he lives in the city or on the farm. This is the clear and strong command of our Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. This is an essential part of the concept of a government of laws, and not men. The Equal Protection Clause [p668] demands no less than substantially equal state legislative representation for all citizens, of all places as well as of all races."
Instructor Explanation:Students will get credit for listing any of these two: unconstitutional, equal protection, violation of 24th Amendment, violation of the 14th Amendment, discrimination, unlawful poll tax, First Amendment. 7.5 points each. If any student lists cases that are listed as precedent in the following case that explains this, this also gives credit. If a student lists the actual Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, then that also counts. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0383_0663_ZO.html
Points Received:15 of 15
2.Question :TCO F. When Vanna White sued Samsung for appropriation and under the Lanham Act, she won her case under the California common law right of publicity claim and under the Lanham Act. List the eight Sleekcraft factors that are required to prove a Lanham Act complaint.
Student Answer: The eight Sleekcraft factors I found were: 1-) strength of the plaintiff’s mark 2-) relatedness of the goods 3-) similarity of the marks 4-) evidence of actual confusion 5-) marketing channels used 6-) likely degree of purchaser care 7-) defendant’s intent in selecting the mark 8-) likelihood of expansion of the product lines Instructor Explanation:(1) strength of the plaintiff’s mark (2) relatedness of the goods
(3) similarity of the marks
(4) evidence of actual confusion
(5) marketing channels used
(6) likely degree of purchaser care
(7) defendant’s intent in selecting the mark
(8) likelihood of expansion of the product lines