Equal Protection - SIMPLIFIED
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 окт 2019
- Our Website ►personalbarprep.com/
Please share, comment, & subscribe!
In our series SIMPLIFIED, Jay Chavkin tackles topics on the California bar exam that often stump students & explains them in a quick, easy-to-understand video. Today: Equal Protection.
Jay Chavkin is the instructor and tutor at Personal Bar Prep, the company he founded in 1995 with the mission to provide California bar exam preparation that is truly personal and that has students directly engaging with the material. Personal Bar Prep offers a live, small group oriented course that focuses on practice and feedback. Jay also provides private tutoring.
For more information about the course or tutoring services, visit personalbarprep.com or call at 818-554-5664.
If you have suggestions for future topics on SIMPLIFIED, please leave a comment!
This is the best explanation I’ve seen on this topic. Thank you!
I know! I just saw his Personal Jurisdiction video and it was awesome too! I wished he had more videos!
Two days before the bar and I understand SDP and EP for the very first time. You are awesome.
Did you pass?
Love this! Thank you! I'm in Massachusetts, but this applies here too :) 😆
Studying for my con law 2 exam, this was great. Thank you!
I finally understood it! thank you :)
Topics are quickly and clearly broken down in an easy-to-follow manner. I really appreciate this video! You're making a stressful time a lot easier for many of us 😅
I appreciate that a lot, thank you.
FANTASTIC Summary!!! Thank you so much for the videos!!
Your videos are great! Thank you so much! 🙏
This is terrific. 🎓 Thank you 🎓
Thank you for simplifying.
Thank you, this was helpful!
Clear, concise explanation, I understand now.
thank you so much for this!
SO HELPFUL!!!!!!!
Excellent
Corrections officers not guards 😂
Super helpful I’m taking the bar in a couple weeks, thank you!
Nebraska, Cool.
the GOAT
4 requirements for a suspect or quasi-suspect classification:
Fundamental:
Q1. History of Pervasive Discrimination due to that traits.
Q2. Those traits do not affect an individual's ability to contribute and perform.
Supporting:
Q3. Those traits are immutable to them. (The immutability test determines whether they should belong to quasi-suspect or suspect)
Q4. Not enough political power to abruptly end the discrimination.
On the basis of race.
Q1: Blacks have been experiencing discrimination ever since like slavery, profiling, selective targeting, and racial slurs.
Q2: Your race does not affect your ability to perform and contribute.
Q3: We can't easily change our racial origin (or even impossible)
Q4: We can say blacks have somehow gained recognition but discrimination still remains.
ANSWER: Suspect Class
Try to answer this on the other traits/status.
thank you for the explanation. i am citing this for paper. did this female jailer case actually happen, or was it just an example that appeared on a bar exam? if it happened, do you know the name of the case? thanks
Do you have a simplified video on privileges and immunity clause of the 14th amendment?
so a state law that gives women custody of their children but requires men to petition government for a license before they are recognized rights to custody is unconstitutional according to the equal protection clause?
Why does the amendment say equal protection of the law rather than can’t make a law that treats people differently? Certainly you could make a law that treats people differently, and then subject everyone equally to its protection.
Is it a denial of equal protection for sheriff dept to accept a criminal complaint against persons for committing criminal conspiracy to make false criminal accusations against another to cause the victim to be incarcerated and held while conspirators liquidate community property in excess of 400k and refuse to get nvestigate further or prosecute conspirators in any way. Thus denying victim access and protection from crimes by law enforcement that was provided to conspirators who made unsupported criminal accusations against the victim who was immediately before incarcerated and held without bail in excess of 90 days ?
Conspirators were female victim was male age 58 ade homeless with serious health issues unable to seek relief in civil court
Was wondering about state action ruling over occurring societal "private individuals/parties" equal protections of life, liberty and pursuits of happiness? If constitutional rights are basically being enslaved by "non-government actors" is the government responsible for not interviewing?
What are your thoughts about using unequal protection for cannabis users in states providing protection for doctors, patients, businesses, but none for any unauthorized users where their prosecution continues with mandatory minimum sentences. Federal law currently and clearly defines cannabis as having no known medical use. The doctors recommendation makes the legal exception and thus determines whether a person cultivating or distributing cannabis, or simply in possession of cannabis as criminal activity or acceptable activity within a states borders even though all cannabis activity at the federal level is illegal, especially distribution and cultivation. While prescriptions can be written for synthesized pharmaceutical Cannabinoids it is illegal for natural whole plant medicine. Most Cannabis laws of the past two decades are about protection from the government. The District of Columbia is the has clearest lack of clarity as the individual must be aware whether where they are standing is Federal or District property. It's nothing short of a trap.
How do equal protection relates to treaty? And if it does.
Treaties rise to the level of federal law and all federal law is subject to Equal Protection analysis as the Equal Protection clause has been reversely incorporated into the U.S. Constitution through the 5th amendment, and thus any classification created by the treaty must pass strict scrutiny with respect to the impact the treaty has on rights of individuals in the United States.
This very on equal protection was very informative,however cdcr prison have word penal logical interest that gives them corrupting power that discourage many inmates. A case that brought attention was case visitation and family reunification,this under the substantive due process law of 14th amendment and 1st amendment of free speech. The individual was refused entry
Anyone interested in arguing the equal protection clause for our at-will employment laws for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment State? Equal protection of our own laws could solve simple poverty. We should have no homeless problem (especially due to unequal protection of our own laws) in an at-will employment State.
Does equal protection apply to criminal cases?
👀
Can a retailer ban my entry to their store if I refused to wear a mask based on my medical condition?
Would it be a violation of my 14th Amendment rights if the retailer’s employee continued to question my stated medical condition?
@@ro9376 Yes, my medical condition is categorized under the ADA?
@@ro9376 Yes & Yes
The answer is yes under the Constitution, because the Constitution only regulates government conduct and the retail store isn't a government entity.
@@Personalbarprep 2 points here: 1. It is a violation of privacy to ask a persons disability. (I believe it is written into the law). Hence the phrase: no mask, can't ask. 2. If the store's mask policy is based on a city/county/state ordinance, then wouldn't the mask ordinance being imposed by the store bring it under the constitution: violation of equal protection for a protected class to not be discriminated against?
Great video. So I have a question as it pertains to the 10th Amendment. The 10th says that the Powers are Reserved to the States Or The People. The word Or is disjunctive and seem to suggest that the People appart from the States also have 10th Amendment Powers. If they do have 10th Amendment Powers can the People expect an equal application of 10th Amendment Powers by the courts when they chose to excersize them???
Thank you for saving my ass 3 times now
Question from layman who's never studied law:
How are urinalysis tests legal under this context?
If the whole issue of the 14th amendment is to stop classifying and treat everyone as equal you must not have a separation to come to a conclusion must treat everyone as everyone else and not one protected class over another protected class
They are doing that now giving preferential treatment to certain classes
🌎🙏🙏🙏🇺🇸 Attorney rights preliminary hearing rights speedy trial rights. Thank God I have the rights to file a civil rights suit
lawyer: the constitution is meant to limit the government
government: IMMUNITY IMMUNITY IMMUNITY
also government: arrest these citizens for violating rights
Police department been discriminate me they say they can't find the reports i been doin about discrimination in different locations they all withe i am Hispanic
What i can do how is the legal way to procedure
For all those taking the bar soon and on to become lawyers, there is still time to repent, haha ha
Did Pennsylvania violate equal protection clause 2020 election???
Joe won get over it snowflake
@@scourgebane1 Ahhh the election was stolen & after the dust settled Sleepy Joe was notified & told to come out from his basement & act presidential...he can't even do that...
I know sex offenders is not a very good subject with judges and Attorneys, but don't you think that Sex offender registration is a Violation of the equal protection clause, in that your address is published on the internet and registration? Germany has condemned registration as a human rights violation.
You didn't mention DISABLED people
Can you address that or do disabled people have no rights?
In short it's again republicans may get through with it, but only IF they openly state that woman do not have the right to equal protection or standing before the law. What makes a morbid part of me interrested in the outcome, because at least they have to be honest then. It's still sad to me bc that means they loose all legitimasy at-least from my standpoint to say it's non-insitutional or not part to how they think.
What it isn't otherwise they wouldn't use a goverments failior as proof of the nature of the people it failed
And similar, but that's just so glaringly obvious, I mean they're Not psychologists who may genuinly belive that goverment can do anything better then anyone else