BARBRI MBE TEST BANK 2026 SOLVED
QUESTIONS WITH FULL SOLUTION GRADED
A+
◉ A state Occupational Health and Safety Board recently issued
regulations valid under its statutory mandate requiring that all employers
in the state provide ionizing air purification systems for all employee
work areas. These regulations replaced previous guidelines for employee
air quality that were generally not mandatory and did not specify the
method of air purification used.
The requirements regarding air purification systems are likely to be
unconstitutional as applied to which of the following employers?
AA wholly owned subsidiary of a Japanese corporation with seven retail
outlets within the state.
BThe state supreme court, which recently completed construction of its
new courthouse with a non-ionizing air purification system which the
builder is contractually bound to maintain for the next three years.
CA United States Armed Forces Recruiting Center located adjacent to
the state capitol building.
,DA priv. Answer: The armed forces recruiting center is least likely to be
required to comply with the new state law. A state has no power to
regulate activities of the federal government unless Congress consents to
the regulation. Accordingly, agents and instrumentalities of the federal
government, such as the armed forces recruiting center, are immune
from state regulations relating to performance of their federal functions.
(D) is incorrect because, although the recreation center's construction
was funded by a loan from the Veterans Administration, the center itself
is privately operated and funded by donations. As a result, the center has
only a tenuous connection with the federal government, so that it cannot
claim the immunity afforded to a federal agency or instrumentality.
Accordingly, in the same sense as is employed in the federal tax
immunity cases, the agency does not "stand in the shoes" of the federal
government. Thus, the application of the state regulations to the
recreation center would not present constitutional problems. (A)
apparently refers to the principle that the power to regulate foreign
commerce lies exclusively with Congress. However, the mere fact that
the regulated outlets are part of a wholly owned subsidiary of a Japanese
corporation does not mean that the state regulations affect foreign
commerce. The subsidiary's activities are conducted entirely within the
state, and do not touch upon foreign commerce in any way. Therefore,
application of the regulations so as to require the subsidiary to provide
an ionizing air purification system for its employee work areas will not
constitute a proscribed state regulation of foreign commerce. Thus, (A)
is incorrect. (B) is more troubling, but does not offer as compelling an
argument as (C). The Contract Clause limits the ability of states to enact
laws that substanti
,◉ The federal government recently constructed a radio telescope in
Puerto Rico. In addition to receiving radio signals, the telescope was set
up to beam radio waves far out into space. As part of the bill providing
for operational funding for the facility, Congress provided for a program
to "inform any aliens who might be listening in outer space of the
'American Way of Religion.'" A $10 million appropriation was provided;
any religious group whose membership exceeded 500 members in the
United States was permitted to prepare a five-minute presentation, and
the federal government would pay for the recording of the presentations
and broadcast them into space using the transmitter in Puerto Rico. The
President signed the bill and it became law. A religious group with a
large following in Europe, but only 100 members in the United States,
protested and filed suit.
Will the court find the religious broadcasts to be constitu. Answer: C
The court will find that the requirement of a minimum number of
members violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The
Establishment Clause prohibits any law "respecting an establishment of
religion." While usually a three-part test based on Lemon v. Kurtzman is
used to determine whether legislation creates improper government
involvement with religion, the "compelling government interest" test is
used if a law or government program discriminates among religions.
Here, the law differentiates among different religious groups, allowing
only those with larger memberships to record presentations. There is no
compelling government interest for discriminating among the religious
groups in this way; thus the legislation is unconstitutional. (A) is
incorrect despite the fact that the federal power to regulate commerce
could be interpreted as extending to commerce with outer space should
the occasion arise. Nevertheless, the commerce power does not override
, independent constitutional restrictions (e.g., the Establishment Clause)
on the conduct in question here. (B) is an incorrect statement of law. The
federal commerce power cannot be used to abrogate freedom of speech
or to discriminate in favor of religious groups. An exercise of the
commerce power generally is subject to all limitations placed on
government by the Constitution, including those of the First
Amendment. (D) is incorrect. Regardless of merit, almost all
expenditures made by Congress are permissible under its spending
power. [U.S. Const. art. I, §8] Rather than limit the power only to
spending for accomplishment of other enumerated powers, this provision
grants Congress broad power to spend for the "general welfare" (i.e., any
public purpose). As long as the expenditure is not conditioned on
requiring a recipient to forgo an individual constitut
◉ On December 6, the owner of an electronics store sent a written
request to a computer manufacturer asking for the price of a certain
laptop computer. The manufacturer sent a written reply with a catalog
listing the prices and descriptions of all of his available computers. The
letter stated that the terms of sale were cash within 30 days of delivery.
On December 14, by return letter, the store owner ordered the computer,
enclosing a check for $4,000, the listed price. Immediately on receipt of
the order and check, the manufacturer informed the store owner that
there had been a pricing mistake in the catalog, which should have
quoted the price as $4,300 for that computer. The store owner refused to
pay the additional $300, arguing that his order of December 14 in which
the $4,000 check was enclosed was a proper acceptance of the
manufacturer's offer.
In a suit for damages, will the manufacturer prevail?
QUESTIONS WITH FULL SOLUTION GRADED
A+
◉ A state Occupational Health and Safety Board recently issued
regulations valid under its statutory mandate requiring that all employers
in the state provide ionizing air purification systems for all employee
work areas. These regulations replaced previous guidelines for employee
air quality that were generally not mandatory and did not specify the
method of air purification used.
The requirements regarding air purification systems are likely to be
unconstitutional as applied to which of the following employers?
AA wholly owned subsidiary of a Japanese corporation with seven retail
outlets within the state.
BThe state supreme court, which recently completed construction of its
new courthouse with a non-ionizing air purification system which the
builder is contractually bound to maintain for the next three years.
CA United States Armed Forces Recruiting Center located adjacent to
the state capitol building.
,DA priv. Answer: The armed forces recruiting center is least likely to be
required to comply with the new state law. A state has no power to
regulate activities of the federal government unless Congress consents to
the regulation. Accordingly, agents and instrumentalities of the federal
government, such as the armed forces recruiting center, are immune
from state regulations relating to performance of their federal functions.
(D) is incorrect because, although the recreation center's construction
was funded by a loan from the Veterans Administration, the center itself
is privately operated and funded by donations. As a result, the center has
only a tenuous connection with the federal government, so that it cannot
claim the immunity afforded to a federal agency or instrumentality.
Accordingly, in the same sense as is employed in the federal tax
immunity cases, the agency does not "stand in the shoes" of the federal
government. Thus, the application of the state regulations to the
recreation center would not present constitutional problems. (A)
apparently refers to the principle that the power to regulate foreign
commerce lies exclusively with Congress. However, the mere fact that
the regulated outlets are part of a wholly owned subsidiary of a Japanese
corporation does not mean that the state regulations affect foreign
commerce. The subsidiary's activities are conducted entirely within the
state, and do not touch upon foreign commerce in any way. Therefore,
application of the regulations so as to require the subsidiary to provide
an ionizing air purification system for its employee work areas will not
constitute a proscribed state regulation of foreign commerce. Thus, (A)
is incorrect. (B) is more troubling, but does not offer as compelling an
argument as (C). The Contract Clause limits the ability of states to enact
laws that substanti
,◉ The federal government recently constructed a radio telescope in
Puerto Rico. In addition to receiving radio signals, the telescope was set
up to beam radio waves far out into space. As part of the bill providing
for operational funding for the facility, Congress provided for a program
to "inform any aliens who might be listening in outer space of the
'American Way of Religion.'" A $10 million appropriation was provided;
any religious group whose membership exceeded 500 members in the
United States was permitted to prepare a five-minute presentation, and
the federal government would pay for the recording of the presentations
and broadcast them into space using the transmitter in Puerto Rico. The
President signed the bill and it became law. A religious group with a
large following in Europe, but only 100 members in the United States,
protested and filed suit.
Will the court find the religious broadcasts to be constitu. Answer: C
The court will find that the requirement of a minimum number of
members violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The
Establishment Clause prohibits any law "respecting an establishment of
religion." While usually a three-part test based on Lemon v. Kurtzman is
used to determine whether legislation creates improper government
involvement with religion, the "compelling government interest" test is
used if a law or government program discriminates among religions.
Here, the law differentiates among different religious groups, allowing
only those with larger memberships to record presentations. There is no
compelling government interest for discriminating among the religious
groups in this way; thus the legislation is unconstitutional. (A) is
incorrect despite the fact that the federal power to regulate commerce
could be interpreted as extending to commerce with outer space should
the occasion arise. Nevertheless, the commerce power does not override
, independent constitutional restrictions (e.g., the Establishment Clause)
on the conduct in question here. (B) is an incorrect statement of law. The
federal commerce power cannot be used to abrogate freedom of speech
or to discriminate in favor of religious groups. An exercise of the
commerce power generally is subject to all limitations placed on
government by the Constitution, including those of the First
Amendment. (D) is incorrect. Regardless of merit, almost all
expenditures made by Congress are permissible under its spending
power. [U.S. Const. art. I, §8] Rather than limit the power only to
spending for accomplishment of other enumerated powers, this provision
grants Congress broad power to spend for the "general welfare" (i.e., any
public purpose). As long as the expenditure is not conditioned on
requiring a recipient to forgo an individual constitut
◉ On December 6, the owner of an electronics store sent a written
request to a computer manufacturer asking for the price of a certain
laptop computer. The manufacturer sent a written reply with a catalog
listing the prices and descriptions of all of his available computers. The
letter stated that the terms of sale were cash within 30 days of delivery.
On December 14, by return letter, the store owner ordered the computer,
enclosing a check for $4,000, the listed price. Immediately on receipt of
the order and check, the manufacturer informed the store owner that
there had been a pricing mistake in the catalog, which should have
quoted the price as $4,300 for that computer. The store owner refused to
pay the additional $300, arguing that his order of December 14 in which
the $4,000 check was enclosed was a proper acceptance of the
manufacturer's offer.
In a suit for damages, will the manufacturer prevail?
