Constitutionality is the prerequisite for acting in accordance with an applicable constitution; [1] the status of a law, procedure or act in accordance with the law or as defined in the applicable constitution. When laws, procedures or actions directly violate the Constitution, they are unconstitutional. All others are considered constitutional until they are challenged and declared different, usually by courts that conduct judicial review. Florida law, which required trucking companies to provide a security deposit or insurance policy to protect the public from injury, but excluded vehicles used exclusively for the delivery of dairy products and carriers that exclusively transported fish, agricultural and dairy products between production and shipping points on their way to the primary market, refused the same protection of laws; And to the extent that it subjected designated carriers for leasing to the same requirements as obtaining a certificate of convenience and necessity and price regulation required of ordinary carriers, the law violated due process. Texas` requirement that a notary be a citizen of the United States does not promote a compelling interest of the state and deprives resident aliens of the same protection of the law. The Louisiana User Tax, as applied, is unconstitutionally discriminatory against interstate commerce because the isolated purchase of a second-hand appliance in Louisiana was not subject to sales tax, while an Oklahoma contractor was subject to the Louisiana Use Tax on second-hand equipment used in well maintenance in Louisiana and purchased in Oklahoma; and in addition that Louisiana sales or use tax was calculated on the cost of components purchased in Louisiana or purchased outside the state for assembly and use in Louisiana, whereas here the contractor paid a user tax on equipment assembled in Oklahoma, which reflected not only the purchase price of the components, but also the cost of labor and loading, which were produced during the assembly of components into a usable device. A district court decision declaring unconstitutional a scholarship law that allows the payment of children attending private schools as part of a programme to combat racial segregation is summarily upheld. A Florida law that provides for prayer and devotional reading in public schools is unconstitutional. Alabama`s fees for the disposal of hazardous waste generated outside the state are not considered direct discrimination against interstate trade.

Alabama has not demonstrated that discrimination against interstate trade by any factor other than economic protectionism is justified and has not demonstrated that its legitimate interests (e.g., the protection of health, safety, and the environment) cannot be served by less discriminatory alternatives. The fee should not be supported by analogy with quarantine laws, as the State allows the import of hazardous waste if the fee is paid. An Oklahoma law that prohibited foreign companies from invoking the diversity of federal courts` citizenship jurisdiction under threat of losing their license to do business in that state imposed an unconstitutional condition. A Washington law that imposed an occupancy tax measured by the gross revenues of radio stations in that state whose programs were received by listeners in other states constituted an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce. An Oklahoma obscenity law authorizing a commission to investigate and recommend the prosecution of wrongful parties is unconstitutional under the authority of Bantam Books v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 (1963). A Wisconsin law that revoked the license of a foreign company that sent a lawsuit against it to federal court by a Wisconsin citizen imposed an unconstitutional condition. An Indiana law requiring all abortions, including those in the first trimester of pregnancy, to be performed in a licensed hospital or health facility has been declared unconstitutional by the district court and the decision is summarily upheld. Montana`s laws, which imposed a business tax on any telephone company that provided services in the state, were an invalid burden on interstate commerce when applied to a company that used the same facilities to provide interstate and domestic services. A Connecticut law that criminalizes anyone using a drug or item to prevent conception is an unconstitutional violation of the privacy of married couples. A Wisconsin income tax law that allowed a husband to be taxed on the combined sum of his and his wife`s income, plus additional taxes resulting from the combination, although the husband has no interest or control over his wife`s property or income under Wisconsin laws, violate the proper process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.

New York`s education and tax laws that provide subsidies to non-public schools for the maintenance and repair of facilities and provide tax and school benefits to parents of children who attend non-public schools violate the settlement clause. Two provisions of Illinois` election law unconstitutionally violate the right of access to ballot boxes guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The first provision, as interpreted by the Illinois Supreme Court, prevented a “new political party” in Cook County from using the name of an already “established” party in the city of Chicago. The second required new political parties to qualify for voting by submitting petitions signed by 25,000 voters in each electoral district to be represented in a political subdivision with multiple electoral districts. A Pennsylvania law that taxed the gross revenues of foreign and domestic companies from the domestic operation of taxis, but because revenues were exempt from individuals and partnerships, denied the same protection of the laws. Louisiana`s violation of the Statute of the Peace is unconstitutionally vague. A Texas tax levied on private telegraph messages sent from the state was an invalid burden on foreign and interstate trade, and to the extent that it was levied on the official communications of federal officials, it constituted an unconstitutional burden on a federal instrument. In Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc., the Supreme Court upheld the Solomon Amendment, which states in the court summary that “if part of a college denies military recruiters access equivalent to that of other recruiters, the entire institution would lose some federal funds.” 26 – Footnote 547, U.S.

47, 51 (2006). FAIR, the group that challenged the Solomon Amendment, is an association of law schools that have banned military recruitment on their campus because of the military`s discrimination against homosexuals. FAIR challenged the Solomon Amendment as a violation of the First Amendment because it required schools to choose between enforcing their anti-discrimination policies against military recruiters and maintaining certain federal funds. The court concluded, “Given that the First Amendment would not prevent Congress from directly enforcing the access requirement of the Solomon Amendment, the law does not impose an unconstitutional condition on the receipt of federal funds.” 27 footnote 547, United States, 60. The court noted that Congress` power to directly request access to campus for military recruiters derives from its Article I, Section 8, the power to provide common defense, raise and support armies, and provide and maintain a navy. Id. at p. 58. The court noted that “the Solomon Amendment does not restrict what law schools can say, nor does it require them to say anything. This affects what law schools need to do – grant equal access to military recruiters – not what they can or cannot say. “28 Fn.

547, United States, 60. The behavior of law schools in excluding military recruiters, the court said, “is not inherently expressive” and therefore, unlike, for example, burning flags, is not “symbolic speech.” 29 footnotes 547, United States, 64, 65. In applying the O`Brien test to behavioral restrictions that have a simultaneous effect on speech, the court noted that the Solomon Amendment “clearly promotes an important government interest that would be less effectively realized without the order.” 30 – Footnote 547, United States, 67. A district court ruling declaring the denial of welfare to non-citizens unconstitutional under Florida`s Equal Protection Clause is summarily upheld. A provision of the Illinois Community Currency Exchange Act that exempts mandates from a designated company, the American Express Company, from the requirement that any company that sells or issues warrants in the state must obtain a license and submit to state regulation denies the same protection of laws as companies that are not exempt. Although the equality clause does not require that all state regulations apply to all those who work in the same enterprise, legal discrimination must be based on differences reasonably related to the objectives of the law. Gasoline transported by interstate buses through Arkansas for use as fuel in interstate transportation beyond the Arkansas line cannot be subject to an Arkansas tax levied for the maintenance of state roads and collected for every gallon of gasoline over 20 brought into the state in a motor vehicle to be used to run it. The law that imposes this tax unconstitutionally weighs on interstate trade. Convicted of attempted execution for stealing chickens and twice for robbery, an Oklahoma law that provides for the sterilization of habitual criminals who have not been convicted of embezzlement or violating the prohibition and tax laws violates the equality clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.