I85PREP
⌘ K
MBE study materials
MBE study resources

MBE practice questions

One question at a time. Build your MBE understanding.

First 50 of 200 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1Civil Procedure

A citizen of State A files a complaint in federal district court against a corporation incorporated in State B with its principal place of business in State B. The complaint asserts a state-law contract claim and seeks $200,000 in damages. The defendant does not object to the court's jurisdiction. Does the court have subject matter jurisdiction?

  1. Yes, because the parties are completely diverse and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Correct answer.
  2. No, because a corporation is a citizen of every state in which it does business.
  3. Yes, because the defendant has waived any objection by failing to raise it.
  4. No, because the claim arises under state law rather than federal law.

Explanation

Diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 requires complete diversity of citizenship between opposing parties and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. A corporation is a citizen of its state of incorporation and the state of its principal place of business, so the parties here are fully diverse. The state-law basis of the claim is irrelevant when diversity is satisfied.

Question 2Civil Procedure

A plaintiff files a diversity action seeking $80,000 in damages. The claim rests on a legal theory that permits recovery in that range, and the plaintiff asserts the amount in good faith. How should the court treat the amount-in-controversy requirement?

  1. It is satisfied, because a good-faith assertion of damages controls unless it appears to a legal certainty that recovery cannot exceed the threshold. Correct answer.
  2. It is satisfied only if the plaintiff ultimately recovers more than $75,000 at trial.
  3. It is not satisfied, because the plaintiff must establish with legal certainty that the amount exceeds $75,000.
  4. It is not met, because the amount in controversy is measured by the defendant's assets.

Explanation

The amount in controversy is judged from the face of the plaintiff's complaint, and a good-faith claim controls unless it is legally certain that the plaintiff cannot recover the stated amount. The requirement is tested at the time of filing, not by the eventual recovery.

Question 3Civil Procedure

A plaintiff brings suit in federal district court alleging violations of the federal antitrust laws. The defendant moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the ground that the plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as the defendant. How should the court rule?

  1. Dismiss, because antitrust claims must be litigated in state court rather than federal court.
  2. Dismiss, because the parties are not diverse and diversity is therefore absent.
  3. Deny the motion only if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
  4. Deny the motion, because jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 as the claim arises under federal law, regardless of the parties' citizenship. Correct answer.

Explanation

Federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 requires only that the plaintiff's claim arise under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. Citizenship of the parties and the amount in controversy are irrelevant when a federal claim appears on the face of a well-pleaded complaint.

Question 4Civil Procedure

A plaintiff sues in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting that the defendant used excessive force in violation of the Constitution. The plaintiff joins a state-law battery claim arising from the same incident. The state-law claim does not independently satisfy diversity. May the court hear the state-law claim?

  1. No, because the state-law claim does not independently satisfy the diversity requirements.
  2. No, because federal courts may not entertain claims that arise under state law.
  3. Yes, but only if the amount in controversy on the state-law claim exceeds $75,000.
  4. Yes, under supplemental jurisdiction, because the state claim arises from the same common nucleus of operative fact as the federal claim. Correct answer.

Explanation

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), a federal court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims that form part of the same case or controversy as a claim within its original jurisdiction. Claims arising from the same incident share a common nucleus of operative fact with the federal claim.

Question 5Civil Procedure

Which standard determines whether a state court's exercise of personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant is consistent with due process?

  1. Whether the defendant has purposeful minimum contacts with the forum and the suit is fair and reasonable. Correct answer.
  2. Whether the plaintiff has resided in the forum state for the period required by the forum's long-arm statute.
  3. Whether the forum state's long-arm statute, as construed by its courts, reaches the defendant's out-of-state conduct.
  4. Whether the defendant was physically present in the forum state when the events giving rise to the claim occurred.

Explanation

Due process permits personal jurisdiction only when the defendant has established minimum contacts with the forum state such that maintaining the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. The contacts must result from the defendant's own purposeful conduct directed at the forum.

Question 6Civil Procedure

A plaintiff sues an individual defendant in federal court and mails a request to waive service, together with the complaint, a prepaid return envelope, and a notice of the consequences of failing to waive. The defendant timely returns the waiver. What is the effect of the waiver?

  1. The defendant waives every objection to the court's jurisdiction, including any objection to subject matter jurisdiction.
  2. The defendant admits liability on the claim by returning the waiver.
  3. The defendant waives formal service but preserves every Rule 12 defense, including lack of personal jurisdiction. Correct answer.
  4. The defendant must still be formally served by a process server before the case may proceed.

Explanation

Rule 4(d) allows a defendant to waive formal service without conceding anything else about the case. A waiver of service saves the cost of personal service but does not waive objections to personal jurisdiction, venue, or the sufficiency of the complaint.

Question 7Civil Procedure

What is the standard for the sufficiency of a complaint under Rule 8(a)(2)?

  1. The complaint must set out in detail the evidence that supports each element of the claim.
  2. The complaint must include legal argument and citations to supporting authority.
  3. A short and plain statement of the claim showing entitlement to relief, with enough factual matter to state a plausible claim. Correct answer.
  4. The complaint must allege every ultimate fact with precision and identify the supporting witnesses.

Explanation

Notice pleading under Rule 8(a)(2) requires only a short and plain statement showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. After Twombly and Iqbal, the factual allegations must raise a plausible, not merely conceivable, entitlement to relief.

Question 8Civil Procedure

A defendant files a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and does not assert a defense of lack of personal jurisdiction. The motion is denied, and the defendant then answers the complaint. May the defendant later move to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction?

  1. No, because a Rule 12 motion that omits a personal jurisdiction defense waives that defense. Correct answer.
  2. No, because personal jurisdiction is never waivable by a defendant.
  3. Yes, because personal jurisdiction may be challenged at any stage of the proceedings.
  4. Yes, because the earlier motion was directed only to the sufficiency of the pleadings.

Explanation

Under Rules 12(g)(2) and 12(h)(1), a party who makes a Rule 12 motion but omits a defense of lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, or insufficient process waives that defense. The defense must be consolidated with any other pre-answer motion.

Question 9Civil Procedure

A plaintiff who is a citizen of State A sues a defendant who is a citizen of State B in State A's state court for $150,000 on a state-law claim. The defendant receives the complaint on March 1 and files a notice of removal on March 20. The defendant is not a citizen of State A. Is removal proper?

  1. No, because the plaintiff is entitled to choose the state forum and that choice may not be disturbed.
  2. No, because removal is available only where a federal question appears on the face of the complaint.
  3. Yes, because the defendant is a non-forum citizen, the parties are diverse, and the notice was timely. Correct answer.
  4. No, because removal of a diversity case requires the plaintiff's consent.

Explanation

A defendant may remove a case that could originally have been brought in federal court, including a diversity case, unless the defendant is a citizen of the forum state. The notice of removal must be filed within 30 days after the defendant receives the initial pleading.

Question 10Civil Procedure

A case is removed to federal court on diversity grounds. Eight months later, the plaintiff moves to remand, arguing that complete diversity is absent because the defendant shares citizenship with the plaintiff. How should the court rule?

  1. Grant the motion, because lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time and requires remand. Correct answer.
  2. Deny the motion, because the plaintiff waived the defect by continuing to litigate for eight months.
  3. Grant the motion only if the plaintiff also shows that the state court is the more convenient forum.
  4. Deny the motion, because the plaintiff failed to move within 30 days after the notice of removal was filed.

Explanation

A motion to remand based on a defect in removal procedure must be made within 30 days, but a challenge based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time. If the federal court lacks jurisdiction, it must remand the case.

Question 11Civil Procedure

A plaintiff sues a single corporate defendant in federal court. Which of the following provides a proper basis for venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)?

  1. The district in which the defendant is incorporated, and no other district, for any claim against a corporation.
  2. The district in which the defendant keeps its largest bank account, if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
  3. The district in which the plaintiff resides, regardless of where the defendant resides or where the events occurred.
  4. A district where any defendant resides if all defendants reside in the same state, or where a substantial part of the events occurred. Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 1391(b) permits venue in a district where any defendant resides if all defendants reside in the same state, or in a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. A fallback exists if neither applies.

Question 12Civil Procedure

A plaintiff sues in the District of Massachusetts, where venue and personal jurisdiction are proper. The events occurred in California, and nearly all witnesses and documents are there. The defendant, who is subject to personal jurisdiction in California, moves to transfer to the Central District of California. How should the court rule?

  1. Transfer only if the plaintiff consents to the change of venue.
  2. Dismiss the action under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
  3. Deny the motion, because venue is proper in Massachusetts and a plaintiff's choice of forum is controlling.
  4. Grant the motion if transfer serves the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice. Correct answer.

Explanation

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a district court may transfer a case to any district where it could have been brought for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interests of justice. The plaintiff's forum choice is a factor but is not dispositive.

Question 13Civil Procedure

A plaintiff files a complaint. The defendant responds with a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Twenty days later, before the court rules on the motion, the plaintiff files an amended complaint. Is the amendment proper?

  1. Yes, because a party may amend once as of right within 21 days after service of a Rule 12(b) motion. Correct answer.
  2. No, because a plaintiff is limited to the claims asserted in the original complaint.
  3. Yes, because a party may amend as of right at any time before the trial begins.
  4. No, because a party may amend only with leave of court after a motion to dismiss has been filed.

Explanation

Rule 15(a)(1)(B) permits a party to amend once as a matter of course within 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or a Rule 12(b) motion, whichever is earlier. The plaintiff's amendment falls within that window.

Question 14Civil Procedure

A plaintiff timely files a complaint against "the driver of the vehicle" without naming the individual. After the limitations period expires, the plaintiff amends the complaint to name the actual driver, who had no notice of the action before the limitations period ran. Does the amendment relate back to the filing date?

  1. Yes, because the amended complaint arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the original complaint.
  2. No, because an amendment may never relate back to add a new party to an action.
  3. No, because the amendment adds a party who lacked notice of the action before the limitations period expired. Correct answer.
  4. Yes, because the plaintiff was diligent in attempting to identify the driver before the limitations period ran.

Explanation

Under Rule 15(c)(1)(C), an amendment changing or adding a party relates back only if the party to be brought in received notice of the action within the period for service such that the party will not be prejudiced. Diligence by the plaintiff does not substitute for notice to the new party.

Question 15Civil Procedure

A defendant is sued for breach of a construction contract. The defendant believes the plaintiff breached that same contract by failing to make scheduled progress payments. Must the defendant assert that claim in the pending action?

  1. No, because the defendant may bring a claim against the plaintiff only in a separate action.
  2. No, because all counterclaims are permissive and may be held back for a separate action.
  3. Yes, because Rule 13 requires a defendant to assert every claim against the plaintiff, even unrelated ones.
  4. Yes, because a claim arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff's claim is a compulsory counterclaim. Correct answer.

Explanation

Rule 13(a) makes compulsory any counterclaim that arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the opposing party's claim and does not require adding a party over whom the court lacks jurisdiction. A compulsory counterclaim omitted from the action is generally lost.

Question 16Civil Procedure

A plaintiff sues a single defendant. The defendant argues that another party whose joinder is not feasible is a required party. What is the proper approach for the court?

  1. Weigh prejudice to the parties and the adequacy of relief, and dismiss only if the action cannot proceed in equity and good conscience. Correct answer.
  2. Dismiss the case automatically, because the absence of a required party always requires dismissal.
  3. Ignore the issue, because the plaintiff has an unconditional right to choose whom to sue in federal court.
  4. Require the plaintiff to join the absent party notwithstanding any immunity from suit.

Explanation

Rule 19(b) directs the court, when a required party cannot be joined, to weigh prejudice to the absent party and existing parties, the possibility of shaping relief, the adequacy of a judgment without the absent party, and whether the plaintiff would have an adequate remedy if the action were dismissed. Dismissal is a last resort.

Question 17Civil Procedure

A trade association whose members would lose their licenses if a challenged regulation is upheld moves to intervene in a timely action seeking to invalidate the regulation. No existing party adequately represents the members' interests, and their interest would be impaired by a ruling upholding the regulation. Should intervention be allowed?

  1. Yes, because the members' interest would be impaired and no existing party adequately represents them. Correct answer.
  2. No, because an association may participate in litigation only by filing an amicus brief with leave of court.
  3. Yes, but only if all of the existing parties consent to the intervention.
  4. No, because intervention as of right is available only to persons who were named as parties in the original pleading.

Explanation

Rule 24(a) grants intervention as of right to a movant who timely claims an interest relating to the property or transaction at issue, is so situated that disposition may impair that interest, and is not adequately represented by existing parties. Consent of the parties is not required.

Question 18Civil Procedure

Which of the following must a plaintiff establish to obtain certification of a class under Rule 23(a)?

  1. Numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. Correct answer.
  2. That the claims present a controlling question of law common to all class members.
  3. That the class contains fewer than 100 members.
  4. That the class representative resides in the forum district.

Explanation

Rule 23(a) requires the class to be so numerous that joinder is impracticable, that questions of law or fact be common to the class, that the representative's claims be typical of the class, and that the representative fairly and adequately protect the class interests. A Rule 23(b) category must also be satisfied.

Question 19Civil Procedure

In a federal diversity action, the plaintiff seeks documents prepared by the defendant's attorney in anticipation of litigation. The plaintiff shows substantial need for the materials and an inability to obtain their equivalent without undue hardship. How should the court rule?

  1. Yes, discovery, because all documents relevant to the claim are discoverable regardless of who prepared them.
  2. No discovery, because attorney work product is absolutely protected in federal court.
  3. No discovery, because the attorney-client privilege automatically attaches to every document in an attorney's file.
  4. Yes, if the party shows substantial need and undue hardship, but opinion work product remains protected. Correct answer.

Explanation

Rule 26(b)(3) protects documents prepared in anticipation of litigation, but a party may obtain them on a showing of substantial need and undue hardship in obtaining the substantial equivalent. The mental impressions, conclusions, and opinions of the attorney remain protected in nearly all circumstances.

Question 20Civil Procedure

Which of the following is required for the entry of summary judgment?

  1. The moving party must produce evidence sufficient to defeat every conceivable defense the opposing party might raise.
  2. The motion is available even where the only dispute concerns the credibility of witnesses.
  3. The court must resolve all factual disputes in favor of the moving party before ruling.
  4. There must be no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant must be entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Correct answer.

Explanation

Rule 56(a) permits summary judgment only when the movant shows that no genuine dispute exists as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court views the record in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, and credibility determinations are for the jury.

Question 21Civil Procedure

A prior federal action ended in a judgment for the defendant after a full trial on whether the defendant breached a particular contract term. A different plaintiff now sues the same defendant on a different contract and seeks to invoke the earlier finding offensively against the defendant. Which statement is correct?

  1. It may be applied if the defendant had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue and the plaintiff could not easily have joined the first action. Correct answer.
  2. Issue preclusion bars the entire second action, because the same defendant was sued in the earlier case.
  3. Issue preclusion applies only when the second action is brought in the same district court as the first.
  4. Issue preclusion is unavailable, because the second plaintiff was not a party to the first action.

Explanation

Federal common law permits nonmutual offensive issue preclusion when the party to be bound had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue and the court concludes that the use is fair, considering whether the plaintiff could readily have joined the earlier suit. The party against whom the issue is asserted was a party to the first action, so mutuality is not required.

Question 22Civil Procedure

A landlord sues a tenant for breach of a commercial lease. The tenant, who has a claim against the landlord for unpaid rent arising under that same lease, fails to assert it. Judgment is entered for the landlord. The tenant then sues the landlord for the unpaid rent. What is the effect of the prior judgment?

  1. The second action is proper, because only the landlord's claim was adjudicated on the merits.
  2. The second action is proper, because the tenant's claim was never actually litigated in the first action.
  3. The second action is barred only if the first court expressly dismissed the counterclaim with prejudice.
  4. The second action is barred, because a compulsory counterclaim that was not asserted is extinguished by the judgment. Correct answer.

Explanation

A claim arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as the opposing party's claim is a compulsory counterclaim under Rule 13(a). If the party fails to assert it and judgment is entered on the merits, claim preclusion treats the omitted compulsory counterclaim as merged into the judgment and bars a later suit.

Question 23Civil Procedure

After the plaintiff's case-in-chief, the defendant moves for judgment as a matter of law; the court denies the motion. The defendant then presents evidence and the jury returns a verdict for the plaintiff. The defendant renews the motion. What standard governs the renewed motion?

  1. The court must deny the renewed motion, because the defendant presented evidence after the first motion for judgment as a matter of law was denied.
  2. The court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and grants the motion only if no reasonable jury could find for the plaintiff. Correct answer.
  3. The court may weigh the evidence and order a new trial, but it may not enter judgment.
  4. The court must grant the motion if the defendant's evidence was stronger than the plaintiff's evidence.

Explanation

A renewed motion under Rule 50(b) tests whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, could permit a reasonable jury to return a verdict for that party. By presenting evidence after denial of the initial motion, the defendant does not waive the right to renew.

Question 24Civil Procedure

A plaintiff brings a diversity action asserting a state-law claim for breach of contract, seeking both money damages and a permanent injunction. The defendant demands a jury trial. Which statement is correct?

  1. The court may empanel an advisory jury only if both parties consent to it.
  2. There is no right to a jury trial in federal court on claims that arise under state law.
  3. A jury trial is available on the legal claims for damages, while the equitable claims are tried by the court. Correct answer.
  4. The jury determines both the legal and the equitable issues, with the court entering judgment on the verdict.

Explanation

The Seventh Amendment preserves the right to a jury trial in suits at common law, and that right applies in diversity cases. Claims for legal relief such as damages are tried to a jury, while equitable claims for injunctive relief are tried to the court, with the court ordinarily resolving equitable issues after the jury's findings.

Question 25Civil Procedure

A district court grants a preliminary injunction against the defendant. The defendant wishes to challenge the order immediately. Which statement is correct?

  1. The order may not be reviewed by any court until the case proceeds to trial.
  2. The order is appealable only if the district court certifies it under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
  3. The order may be appealed only after a final judgment is entered in the case.
  4. The order is immediately appealable as of right under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 1292(a)(1) grants the courts of appeals jurisdiction over interlocutory orders granting, continuing, modifying, refusing, or dissolving injunctions. Preliminary injunction orders are therefore appealable as of right without waiting for final judgment.

Question 26Civil Procedure

A plaintiff files and serves a complaint on the defendant. Instead of answering, the defendant timely serves a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). The plaintiff now wishes to amend the complaint once as a matter of course rather than seek leave. What is the plaintiff's deadline?

  1. Within 21 days after the motion to dismiss is served. Correct answer.
  2. Only with the defendant's written consent or by leave of court, because the defendant has already appeared and moved to dismiss.
  3. Within 30 days after the motion is denied or the answer is served, whichever occurs first.
  4. Within 14 days after the motion to dismiss is served.

Explanation

Under Rule 15(a)(1)(B), a party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b). No leave of court or consent is needed during that window. Once the window closes, amendment requires the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave.

Question 27Civil Procedure

A plaintiff sued a delivery company in federal court for injuries suffered in a highway collision and won a judgment on a negligence theory. The plaintiff now sues the same company in federal court over the same collision, asserting that the company negligently hired the driver, a theory the plaintiff could have raised in the first action. How should the second action be treated?

  1. It is barred, because both suits arise from the same transaction. Correct answer.
  2. It is barred, but only because the first court's judgment expressly stated that it resolved every theory arising from the collision.
  3. It may proceed, because the facts supporting the hiring theory were discovered only after the first judgment was entered.
  4. It may proceed, because negligent hiring is a distinct legal theory from the negligence actually litigated in the first action.

Explanation

Claim preclusion bars a second suit on the same claim, and a claim is measured by the transaction or occurrence that gave rise to it, not by the legal theory chosen. All theories of recovery arising from the same collision had to be asserted in the first action. Newly discovered evidence does not create a new claim; relief from the earlier judgment must be sought in that action.

Question 28Civil Procedure

An employee sues an employer in federal court, asserting a claim for unpaid overtime wages (a legal claim for money damages) and a claim for reinstatement (an equitable claim). Both claims turn on the same disputed fact: whether the employee was discharged for complaining about overtime. The employee demands a jury. How should the court proceed?

  1. Try the equitable claim first without a jury, and treat the court's findings as controlling on the later legal claim.
  2. Submit both claims to the jury, because a timely jury demand makes every issue in the case triable to a jury.
  3. Deny the jury demand entirely, because the request for reinstatement is the predominant form of relief sought in the case.
  4. Submit the legal claim to the jury, then decide the equitable claim in light of the jury's findings on the common facts. Correct answer.

Explanation

The Seventh Amendment guarantees a jury trial on claims for legal relief such as damages, but not on claims for equitable relief such as reinstatement. When the claims share common fact issues, the jury must decide those issues first so that the court's equitable determination does not impair the jury right. The court then decides the equitable claim itself, bound by the jury's findings.

Question 29Civil Procedure

A company is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in Ohio. It operates distribution warehouses in Pennsylvania, which generate roughly thirty percent of its revenue. A Pennsylvania plaintiff sues the company in Pennsylvania federal court on a contract claim that was negotiated and performed entirely in Ohio and has no connection to the warehouses. May the court exercise personal jurisdiction over the company?

  1. Yes, because a corporation that does substantial business in a state consents to suit there on any claim, whether or not the claim relates to that business.
  2. No, because the company is not at home in Pennsylvania and this claim is unrelated to its Pennsylvania contacts. Correct answer.
  3. No, because a corporation may be sued only in the state of its incorporation and the state of its principal place of business.
  4. Yes, because maintaining warehouses in Pennsylvania is a substantial, continuous, and systematic course of business supporting general jurisdiction.

Explanation

A corporation is "at home" for general jurisdiction only where it is incorporated or has its principal place of business, absent an exceptional case. Substantial in-state business does not by itself make a corporation at home in the state. Specific jurisdiction is also unavailable here because the contract claim does not arise out of or relate to the company's Pennsylvania activities.

Question 30Constitutional Law

The principle that federal courts may invalidate an act of Congress that conflicts with the Constitution was established in which decision?

  1. McCulloch v. Maryland
  2. Marbury v. Madison Correct answer.
  3. Dred Scott v. Sandford
  4. Gibbons v. Ogden

Explanation

Marbury v. Madison established judicial review, the authority of federal courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional. McCulloch addressed implied federal powers, and Gibbons concerned the Commerce Clause.

Question 31Constitutional Law

To satisfy Article III standing, a plaintiff must allege...

  1. an injury suffered primarily by a third party rather than the plaintiff
  2. a generalized grievance shared by all members of the public
  3. a question of law certified to the court by a federal agency
  4. a concrete and particularized injury caused by the defendant Correct answer.

Explanation

Article III requires an injury in fact that is concrete and particularized, fairly traceable to the defendant, and likely redressable by a favorable ruling. Generalized grievances and third-party injuries generally do not suffice.

Question 32Constitutional Law

A federal court may hear an otherwise moot case under which exception?

  1. when the conduct is capable of repetition yet evading review Correct answer.
  2. when the parties stipulate that the issue remains important
  3. when the plaintiff seeks money damages from a state
  4. when the case presents a political question

Explanation

The capable-of-repetition-yet-evading-review exception applies when the challenged action is too short in duration to be fully litigated and the same plaintiff is likely to face it again. Party stipulation does not create Article III jurisdiction.

Question 33Constitutional Law

In Rucho v. Common Cause, the Supreme Court held that challenges to partisan gerrymandering...

  1. are justiciable under the Equal Protection Clause
  2. are reviewed under strict scrutiny for racial classifications
  3. are nonjusticiable political questions Correct answer.
  4. must be filed in state court rather than federal court

Explanation

Rucho held that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of federal courts because there is no judicially manageable standard. Racial gerrymandering claims remain justiciable.

Question 34Constitutional Law

A state employee sues a state official in federal court for violating federal law and seeks prospective injunctive relief. Under Ex parte Young, the suit...

  1. may proceed only if the state consents to the suit
  2. is barred unless the United States joins as a party
  3. may proceed because the suit seeks prospective relief from an official Correct answer.
  4. is barred because the Eleventh Amendment shields state officials from all suits

Explanation

Ex parte Young allows federal suits against state officials for prospective injunctive relief to stop ongoing violations of federal law, even though the state itself is immune. The exception does not permit retroactive damages against the state.

Question 35Constitutional Law

When a federal statute and a state statute conflict, the state statute is invalid under...

  1. the Tenth Amendment
  2. the Supremacy Clause Correct answer.
  3. the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV
  4. the Full Faith and Credit Clause

Explanation

The Supremacy Clause makes the Constitution and federal laws supreme over conflicting state law. The Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the states but does not override valid federal law.

Question 36Constitutional Law

Under United States v. Lopez, which activity is most likely beyond Congress's Commerce Clause power?

  1. operating a national trucking company
  2. possessing a gun in a local school zone Correct answer.
  3. selling goods across state lines
  4. charging admission to a professional basketball game played in the state

Explanation

Lopez struck down the Gun-Free School Zones Act because possessing a firearm near a school is not economic activity and did not substantially affect interstate commerce. Regulating instrumentalities and channels of interstate commerce remains valid.

Question 37Constitutional Law

A state operates a cement plant that sells cement only to in-state buyers and refuses to sell to out-of-state buyers. The state is...

  1. violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause
  2. acting as a market participant, outside the Dormant Commerce Clause Correct answer.
  3. subject to strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause
  4. violating the Dormant Commerce Clause because the policy discriminates against outsiders

Explanation

A state acting as a market participant may favor its own residents in buying or selling goods without violating the Dormant Commerce Clause. The doctrine restricts state regulation, not the state's own proprietary conduct.

Question 38Constitutional Law

A nondiscriminatory state regulation imposes incidental burdens on interstate commerce. Under Pike v. Bruce Church, the regulation is valid unless...

  1. the regulation touches any activity in interstate commerce
  2. the regulation applies to both in-state and out-of-state businesses
  3. the burden on interstate commerce clearly exceeds the local benefits Correct answer.
  4. the state failed to obtain federal approval

Explanation

Pike applies a balancing test to nondiscriminatory regulations: the law is upheld unless the burden on interstate commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the local benefits. Applying the law evenhandedly supports its validity rather than defeating it.

Question 39Constitutional Law

Congress may condition federal highway funds on a state's raising its drinking age to 21 because...

  1. the Twenty-First Amendment requires a uniform drinking age
  2. spending conditions are immune from constitutional review
  3. the condition is related to highway safety and is not coercive Correct answer.
  4. states have no authority over drinking ages

Explanation

Under South Dakota v. Dole, Congress may attach conditions to federal spending if they serve the general welfare, are unambiguous, relate to the federal interest, and do not coerce the states. A condition tied to highway safety and a modest share of funding is generally permissible.

Question 40Constitutional Law

A federal statute requires state legislatures to enact a specific waste-disposal program. The statute is likely...

  1. valid under the Commerce Clause because waste affects interstate commerce
  2. valid because states must enforce federal law under the Supremacy Clause
  3. invalid because it commandeers the state legislature Correct answer.
  4. invalid because it is a bill of attainder

Explanation

The Tenth Amendment bars Congress from commandeering state legislatures to implement federal regulatory programs. Congress may regulate directly or use spending conditions, but it may not order states to enact legislation.

Question 41Constitutional Law

A state law retroactively reduces the interest rate on existing mortgages between private parties. Under the Contracts Clause, the law is...

  1. subject to heightened review, and the state must show a significant public purpose Correct answer.
  2. invalid per se, regardless of the state's purpose
  3. valid because states may impair contracts at will
  4. valid because the Contracts Clause applies only to the federal government

Explanation

The Contracts Clause prohibits states from impairing contractual obligations, but not absolutely. For substantial impairment of private contracts, courts ask whether the state has a significant and legitimate public purpose and whether the adjustment is reasonable.

Question 42Constitutional Law

Before a state terminates a welfare recipient's benefits, procedural due process generally requires...

  1. notice and an opportunity for a hearing Correct answer.
  2. a grand jury indictment
  3. approval by the state legislature
  4. a unanimous jury verdict

Explanation

Goldberg v. Kelly held that procedural due process requires notice and an opportunity for a hearing before terminating welfare benefits. The hearing need not take the form of a criminal trial.

Question 43Constitutional Law

A state law burdens a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause. Courts review the law under...

  1. the political question doctrine
  2. intermediate scrutiny
  3. strict scrutiny Correct answer.
  4. rational basis review

Explanation

Substantive due process protects certain fundamental liberties, and infringements are reviewed under strict scrutiny. The law must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.

Question 44Constitutional Law

A state university uses racial preferences in admissions. Under current Supreme Court precedent, the policy is reviewed under...

  1. rational basis review
  2. intermediate scrutiny
  3. strict scrutiny Correct answer.
  4. the Contracts Clause

Explanation

Racial classifications by the government are subject to strict scrutiny and must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the Court effectively foreclosed race-based admissions preferences.

Question 45Constitutional Law

A state law provides different benefits to men and women. The law is valid only if it...

  1. applies equally to both groups
  2. serves important governmental objectives and is substantially related to them Correct answer.
  3. is rationally related to a legitimate government interest
  4. is approved by Congress

Explanation

Gender classifications are reviewed under intermediate scrutiny. The state must show an important governmental objective and a substantial relationship between the classification and that objective.

Question 46Constitutional Law

A state law requiring drivers over 75 to retake a road test is reviewed under...

  1. intermediate scrutiny
  2. the Privileges or Immunities Clause
  3. rational basis review Correct answer.
  4. strict scrutiny

Explanation

Age is not a suspect or quasi-suspect classification, so age-based regulations are reviewed under rational basis. The law is valid if it is rationally related to a legitimate government interest such as highway safety.

Question 47Constitutional Law

A state permanently physically occupies a portion of a homeowner's land for a public road. Under the Takings Clause, the state must...

  1. show only a rational basis for the occupation
  2. demonstrate that the land is blighted
  3. pay just compensation because the occupation is a per se taking Correct answer.
  4. obtain a federal permit

Explanation

A permanent physical occupation of private property is a per se taking under Loretto, and the government must pay just compensation. The public use requirement is satisfied by a road, but compensation is still required.

Question 48Constitutional Law

A city ordinance prohibits all signs criticizing the mayor. The ordinance is...

  1. presumptively invalid as a content-based restriction Correct answer.
  2. valid because it leaves open other channels of communication
  3. valid because it is content-neutral
  4. valid as a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction

Explanation

A law that restricts speech based on its content is presumptively invalid and subject to strict scrutiny. It must serve a compelling interest and be narrowly tailored.

Question 49Constitutional Law

A city requires a permit before any parade may be held and gives officials unlimited discretion to deny permits. The permit scheme is...

  1. valid because it is a time, place, and manner regulation
  2. valid because parades use public streets
  3. invalid as a prior restraint lacking objective standards Correct answer.
  4. valid if the permit fee is small

Explanation

A permit scheme that gives officials unlimited discretion is an unconstitutional prior restraint. Licensing standards must be narrow, objective, and definite, with prompt review.

Question 50Constitutional Law

A state erects a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of its capitol alongside other historical monuments. Under the Supreme Court's approach in Van Orden v. Perry, the display is...

  1. invalid unless every monument on the grounds is religious
  2. valid only if the state also funds a church
  3. likely permissible because it is part of a broader historical display Correct answer.
  4. automatically invalid because it contains religious text

Explanation

Van Orden upheld a Ten Commandments monument on Texas capitol grounds because it was one of many monuments in a historical and secular setting. Context and purpose matter in Establishment Clause analysis.