A state legislature passes a law requiring all contractors who receive public funding to certify that they will not hire workers who belong to certain labor unions. A contractor who receives public funds challenges the law, arguing that it violates constitutional protections. Is the contractor likely to succeed in this challenge?
No, because the state has broad authority to regulate labor practices to advance general welfare.
Yes, because the law breaches the contracts clause by impairing existing contractual obligations.
No, because states are permitted to place reasonable conditions on how public funds are used.
Yes, because the law violates the unconstitutional conditions doctrine by compelling the contractor to forgo protected First Amendment rights.
The contractor is likely to succeed because the law imposes an unconstitutional condition. The unconstitutional conditions doctrine prohibits the government from conditioning the receipt of public benefits, such as funding, on the forfeiture of a constitutional right. In this instance, the state is compelling the contractor to waive its right to freedom of association, which is protected under the First Amendment. The government may only impose such conditions if they are narrowly tailored and serve a compelling governmental interest, which the state is unlikely to demonstrate here. Other answers are incorrect because they fail to recognize the infringement on constitutional rights or rely on inapplicable doctrines like the contracts clause, which does not govern this issue.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is the unconstitutional conditions doctrine?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What does the First Amendment protect in this context?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the implications of the contracts clause?