14th Amendment and Substantive Rights

The video discusses the evolution of substantive due process, starting with the Mun v. Illinois case in 1877, which expanded due process rights following the decline of the Privileges or Immunities Clause. It explains Matthew Hale's legal distinctions and their application to public interest businesses. The video also covers the historical context and legal reasoning behind the shift from the Privileges or Immunities Clause to the Due Process Clause in the 14th Amendment.

What was the significance of the Mun v. Illinois case in 1877?

• It marked the end of the Privileges or Immunities Clause.

• It was the first case to address substantive due process.

• It introduced the concept of judicial review.

• It was the first case to involve the 14th Amendment.

Which of the following is NOT one of the legal distinctions made by Chief Justice Matthew Hale?

• Use privatim

• Use regium

• Use communis

• Use publicum

What does the term 'use publicum' refer to?

• Government activities

• Private activities with no public interest

• Common law practices

• Businesses affected with a public interest

According to the Mun case, what can businesses affected with a public interest be subject to?

• No regulations at all

• A duty to serve all members of the public equally

• Complete government control

• Only federal regulations

What limitation does due process impose on government regulation?

• It allows complete government control over all businesses.

• It prevents regulation of businesses in the use publicum.

• It allows regulation of purely private matters.

• It prevents regulation of purely private matters.

Why did the court in Mun provide no textual explanation for the due process clause's role?

• They thought it was irrelevant to the case.

• They lacked a clear understanding of the clause.

• They believed it was self-explanatory.

• They relied on the Privileges or Immunities Clause instead.

What argument is made for the Privileges or Immunities Clause in relation to substantive rights?

• It should only apply to federal cases.

• It should be completely disregarded.

• It should be used to justify the doctrine in cases like Mun.

• It should be replaced by the due process clause.

What realization did lawmakers have regarding the 14th Amendment by 1872?

• The Privileges or Immunities Clause should not have been prematurely ended.

• The due process clause was more effective.

• The 14th Amendment needed to be repealed.

• The Privileges or Immunities Clause was unnecessary.

What was Justice Strong's stance on substantive rights under the 14th Amendment?

• He thought substantive rights were irrelevant.

• He advocated for very few substantive rights.

• He believed there should be no substantive rights.

• He supported the existence of substantive rights.

What happened to the coalition advocating for few substantive rights under the 14th Amendment?

• It became more influential.

• It gained more support.

• It remained unchanged.

• It fell apart.