Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
A. Free Speech
TEST
Clear and
present danger
test
Brandenburg
test (Imminent
lawless action
or IIL)
DEFINITION/REQUISITES/ELEMENTS
There must be a clear and present danger of an evil
substantive enough to warrant state interference. It is a
question of proximity and degree.
Success of the obstruction is unnecessary; the tendency
and intent of the act are sufficient.
State should not forbid advocacy of the use of force or of
law violation, except if advocacy is directed to inciting or
producing imminent lawless action, and is likely to incite
and produce such action.
APPLICATION
Regime for free speech
cases in the Philippines
Advocacy speech
Requisites
1. Incitement
2. Imminence
3. Likelihood
OBrien test
Determination of whether
statute is content-based or
content-neutral
Immediate
scrutiny
Strict scrutiny
Requisites:
1. Government must allege a state interest.
2. Classification must bear a reasonable relation to
the purpose.
3. There is a strong presumption of validity in favor
of the classification.
Requisites:
1. Government must show the classification serves
an important state interest.
2. Classification must be substantially related to
the interest alleged.
Classification and
differentiation statutes
Applies to gender &
legitimacy cases, contentneutral prohibitions, and
substantive due process
cases (see White Light v. City
of Manila)
D. Libel
Actual malice
rule
Espaola
A2016
2
TEST
DEFINITION/REQUISITES/ELEMENTS
E. Sexually explicit expression
Pita procedure
Miller test
(Obscenity test)
APPLICATION
Obscene materials
Void for
vagueness
doctrine
Overbreadth
doctrine
G. Religion cases
Sherbert test
3
TEST
Lemon test
DEFINITION/REQUISITES/ELEMENTS
If yes to all the questions below, then the statute is
constitutional:
1. Does the statute have a secular legislative
purpose?
2. Does its primary effect neither advance nor
inhibit religion?
3. Does the statute not foster an excessive
entanglement with religion?
APPLICATION
Non-establishment cases
Strict
separation
Strict
neutrality
Benevolent
neutrality
Usually employed in
American jurisprudence
Relied on in Philippine
jurisprudence
H. Due process
4
TEST
Principles of
substantive due
process
Contracts
clause
Validity of
ordinances
DEFINITION/REQUISITES/ELEMENTS
Requisites:
1. Law shall be prescribed in harmony with the
general powers of the legislative department of
the Government.
2. The law shall be reasonable in its operation.
3. It shall be enforced according to the regular
methods of procedure prescribed.
It shall be applicable alike to all the citizens of the state
or to all of a class.
The statute restraining contracts must:
1. Have a state obligation that is reasonable and
necessary to serve an important public purpose;
2. Be necessary;
3. Be the only alternative;
4. Meet the purpose of the law;
5. Be essential to the achievement of an important
state purpose.
An ordinance, to be a valid exercise of police power,
must:
1. Not contravene the Constitution or any statute;
2. Not be unfair or oppressive;
3. Not be partial or discriminatory;
4. Not prohibit but may regulate trade;
5. Be general and consistent with public policy;
6. Be reasonable.
APPLICATION
Ordinances, of course
I. Right of privacy
Artificial
trimester
regime
Undue burden
standard
Applied in Planned
Parenthood, to weigh
womans right to decide vs.
state interests
J. Equal protection
Four-prong test
5
TEST
Miranda
warnings
Additional
rights
References:
DEFINITION/REQUISITES/ELEMENTS
Prior to any questioning while in custodial investigation,
the person arrested or detained must be warned of the
following:
1. He has a right to remain silent, and anything
he says can be used against him in a court of
law.
2. He has the right to counsel, and if he cannot
afford an attorney, one will be appointed for
him prior to questioning, if he so desires.
After such warnings, the individual may waive the
aforementioned rights. Without these warnings, however,
any confession obtained from the accused is
inadmissible.
In addition to the Miranda rights, the Court in the case of
Mahinay stated that a person arrested, detained or
invited under custodial investigation must be informed:
1. In a language known to and understood by him
of the reason for his arrest, and must be shown
the warrant of arrest. Every other warning,
information or communication must be in a
language known to and understood by him.
2. That, at any time, he has the right to
communicate or confer by the most expedient
means (telephone, etc.) with his lawyer, any
member of his immediate family or any medical
doctor, priest or minister chosen by him or by his
counsel or by any member of his immediate
family;
3. That he has a right to be visited by or confer
with accredited national or international
NGOs;
4. That he has a right to waive any of the said
rights provided that he does so voluntarily and
intelligently;
5. That any waiver of the right to a lawyer must be
done in writing and in the presence of counsel;
otherwise, the waiver is void.
APPLICATION
During custodial
investigation, which begins
once the accused is
subjected to police custody,
or is deprived of his freedom
of action in any significant
way