CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II

Atty. Butch Jamon

OUTLINE OF READINGS

I. PLACE OF JUDICIAL POWER

A. In General
1. Const. Art. VIII, sec 1
2. Const. Art. VIII, sec 2
3. Const. Art. VIII, sec 4.2
4. Const. Art. VIII, sec 5.2

Cases:
Marbury vs. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Crunch) 137 (1803)
Angara vs. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil. 139 (1936)
Garcia vs. Board of Investments, 191 SCRA 288
Oposa vs. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792
Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS, 267 SCRA 402
Kilosbayan vs. Guingona, 232 SCRA 110
Kilosbayan vs. Morato, 246 SCRA 540 (1 Bernas 571)
Tanada vs. Angara, 272 SCRA 18
Santiago vs. Bautista, 32 SCRA 188 (1 Bernas 498)

B. Case or Controversy Requirement: Elements

Alexander Bickel, The Supreme Court 1960 Term Foreword: The Passive
Virtues, 75 HARV. L. REV 40 (1961)

Standing

PACU v. Secretary, 97 Phil 806, (1 Bernas 539)

Gonzalez v. Hechanova, 9 SCRA 230
Gonzalez v. Marcos, 65 SCRA 624 (1 Bernas 540)
People v. Vera, 65 Phil 58
Flast v. Cohen, 392 US 83
Francisco vs. House of Representatives G.R. 160261 (November 2003)

Ripeness
Tan vs. Macapagal, 43 SCRA 678 (1 Bernas 537)
Poe vs. Ullman, 367 US 497 (1961)
US v. Richardson, 418 US 166 (1974)

Mootness

Lacson v. Perez
Sanlakas v. Exec. Sec, GR 159085, Feb 3, 2004
De Funis v. Odegaard, 416 US, 312 (1974)

1
II. DUE PROCESS CLAUSE

Const. Art III, sec. 1

1. Procedural Due Process

Banco Espanol Filipino vs. Palanca, 37 Phil 921 (2 Bernas 4)
Ang Tibay vs. CIR, 69 Phil 635 (2 Bernas 6)
Ateneo vs. Court of Appeals, 145 SCRA 106
Non vs. Judge Dames, 185 SCRA 523 (2 Bernas 14)
Golberg vs. Kelly, 397 US 254 (1970)
UP vs. Hon Ligot- Telan 227 SCRA 342
DBP vs. NLRC, 183 SCRA 328
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, 369 SCRA 394 (19 Nov 2001)

2. Old Substantive Due Process: Protection for Property Interests

Lochner v. New York, 198 US 45 (1905)
NDC and AGRIX vs. Phil Veterans, 192 SCRA 257 (2 Bernas 48)
Balacuit v. CFI, 163 SCRA 182 (2 Bernas 41)

3. New Substantive Due Process: Protection for Liberty Interest in

Privacy
Warren and Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 Harv. L. Rev. 193 (1890)
Cortes, I, Constitutional Foundations of Privacy , in EMERGING TRENDS
IN LAW, 1-70 (1983)

Olmstead vs. US, Brandeis dissenting, 277 US 438

Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 US 535 (1942)
Griswold vs. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965)
Eisenstadt vs. Baird, 405 US 438
Roe vs. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
Bowers vs. Hardwick, 106 S Ct. 2841 (1986)
Laurence vs. Texas, 02-0102 (26 June 2003)
Board of Education vs. Earls, 01-332 (27 June 2002)
Ople vs. Torres, 141 SCRA 293
KMU v. NEDA
Duncan Assoc vs. Glaxo Welcome, GR No. 162994, Sept 17, 2004

4. Protected Interests in Property

Mere Regulation under the Due Process Clause versus Taking of Property
via the Power of Eminent Domain

Const. Art. III, Sec. 9

Churchill vs. Rafferty, 32 Phil 580
US vs. Toribio, 15 PHIL 85
People vs. Fajardo, 100 Phil 443
Ynot vs. Court of Appeals, 148 SCRA 659

2
 US vs. Causby, 328 US 256
Republic vs. PLDT, 26 SCRA 620
Republic vs. Castelvi, 58 SCRA 336
Bel-Air Association vs. IAC, 176 SCRA 719
EPZA vs. Dulay, 149 SCRA 305
NPC vs. CA , 129 SCRA 665

Takings under Eminent Domain Clause

Takings under the Social Justice Clause

De Knecht vs. Bautista, 100 SCRA 660

Republic vs. De Knecht, 182 SCRA 141
Manotok vs. NHA, 150 SCRA 89
Ermita Malate Hotel and Motel Operators vs. City of Manila, 20 SCRA 849
Assoc. of Small Landowners vs. Sec. of Agrarian Reform, 175 SCRA 343
Luz Farms vs. Secretary, 192 SCRA 51
Cariday vs. CA (Note: Gutierrez J., dissenting), 176 SCRA 31

III. EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE

Art. III, Sec. 1

Art. II, Secs. 14 and 22

Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil. 1155

Korematsu v. U.S. 323 U.S. 214 (1944)
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)
Brown vs. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
Univ. of California v. Bakke,438 U.S. 265 (1978)
Gratz v. Bollinger / Grutter v. Bollinger, 02-516 (23 June 2003)
Bradwell v. Illinois, 83 U.S. 130 (1873)
Goesart v. Cleary, 335 U.S. 464 (1948) (2 Bernas 76)
Geduldig v. Aiello, 417 U.S. 484(1974)
Mississippi Univ. School for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718 (1982)
Michael M. v. Superior Court, 450 U.S. 464 (1981)
Personnel Administrator v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256 (1979)
Yick Wo. v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 365 (1886)
Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu, 888 F. 2d 591 (1989);
Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu, 110 S. Ct. 1811 (1990)

Defensor-Santiago, The New Equal Protection, 58 Phil. L. J. 1

(March 1993)

International School Alliance v. Quisumbing, 333 SCRA 13 (June 2000)

Board of Directors v. Rotary Club, 481 U.S. 537
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, No. 99-699 (28 June 2000)

3
 Goodridge v. Dept of Public Health, 440 Mass. 309, 798 N.E.2d 941
(Nov. 18, 2003)
Tecson v. Commn on Elections, G.R. No. 161434, Mar. 3, 2004

IV. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Art. III, Sec. 4

A. Protected Speech

1. Prior Restraint
Near v. Minnesota, 238 U.S. 697
New York Times v. U.S., 403 U.S. 713
Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U.S. 51

2. Subsequent Punishment
People v. Perez, 45 Phil. 599
Dennis v. U.S., 341 U.S. 494
Abrams v. U.S., 250 U.s. 616 (1919)
Eastern Broadcasting v. Dans, 137 SCRA 628

3. Speech Plus: Symbolic Speech

U.S. v. OBrien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968)
Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)

4. Assembly and Petition

PBM Employees v. PBM, 51 SCRA 189
Primicias v. Fugoso, 80 Phil. 78 (Hilado, dissenting)
Navarro v. Villegas, 31 SCRA 731
JBL Reyes v. Bagatsing, 125 SCRA 553
Malabanan v. Ramento, 129 SCRA 359

5. Free Speech and Suffrage

Gonzalez v. COMELEC, 27 SCRA 835
Sanidad v. COMELEC, 181 SCRA 529
National Press Club v. COMELEC, 207 SCRA 1
Adiong v. COMELEC, 207 SCRA 712

6. Use of private property as a forum for others speech

Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980)

4
B. Unprotected Speech

1. Defamatory Speech
Policarpio v. Manila Times, 5 SCRA 148
Lopez v. CA, 34 SCRA 116
New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254
Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, 403 U.S. 29
Ayer Production v. Judge Capulong, 160 SCRA 865
Soliven v. Hon. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 394
MVRS v. Islamic Dawah Council, G.R. 135306, 28 January 2003
US vs. Bustos, 37 Phil 731

2. Fighting Words, Offensive Words

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971)

3. Obscenity
Roth v. U.S., 354 U.S. 476 (1957)
Miller v. California, 37 L. Ed. 419 (1973)
Gonzalez v. Kalaw Katigbak, 137 SCRA 717
Pita v. CA, 178 SCRA 362
Mideo Cruz Controversy Polytheism (August 15, 2011)

4. Defamation and Discrimination in C. MacKinnon, ONLY WORDS

Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844 (26 June 1997)
Ashcroft v. ACLU, No. 00-1293 (13 May 2002)

V. CHURCH AND STATE: THE WALL OF SEPARATION

Art. II, Sec. 6

Art. III, Sec. 4
Art. VI, Sec. 29(2)

A. Establishment Clause
Aglipay v. Ruiz, 64 Phil. 201
Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602
Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236
County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 57 LW 5045, in relation to
Lynch v. Donnely, 465 U.S. 668 (1984)
Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968)
School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, No. 1751, 27 June 2002
Tilton v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 672

5
 Velarde v. Society for Social Justice, G.R. No. 159357, 28 April 2004
Marcelino C. Arias v. University of the Philippines Board of Regents,
Regional Trial Court, CC Case No. 47696 RTC-QC (Branch 27)

B. Free Exercise Clause

American Bible Society v. City, 101 Phil. 386
Gerona v. Secretary of Education, 106 Phil. 2
Ebralinag v. Division Superintendent, 219 SCRA 256
Pamil v. Teleron, 86 SCRA 413
McDaniel v. Paty, 435 U.S. 618
German v. Barangan, 135 SCRA 514
Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 163
Newdow v. U.S. Congress, 00-16423 (26 June 2002)
Anucension v. NLU, 80 SCRA 350
Iglesia Ni Cristo v. CA, 259 SCRA 529 (26 July 1996)
Commonwealth v. Twitchell, 416 Mass. 114 (1993)
Estrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P-02-1651, 408 SCRA 1, Aug. 4, 2003

C. Unusual Religious Beliefs and Practices

Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205
U.S. v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78
U.S. v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965)
Cassius Clay a.k.a. Muhammad Ali v. United States, 403 U.s. 698 (1971)

VI. Unlawful Searches and Seizures

Art. III, Sec. 2

David vs. Macapagal (2006)
Katz vs. US (1967)
Papa vs. Mago (1968)
People vs. Marti (1991)
Stonehill vs. Diokno (1967)
Terry vs. Ohio (1967)
Aniag . Comelec

VII. ACADEMIC FREEDOM

Background reading: Byrne: Academic Freedom: A Special Concern of the

First Amendment, 99 Yale L.J. 25 (1989)

Art. XIV, Secs. 1, 5(5)

Garcia v. Faculty Admission Committee, 68 SCRA 277

Isabelo v. Perpetual Help, 227 SCRA 591

6
 Reyes v. Court of Appeals, 194 SCRA 402
U.P. v. Court of Appeals, 218 SCRA 728 (9 February 1993)
DECS v. San Diego, 180 SCRA 534, and
Tablarin v. Gutierrez, 154 SCRA 730

VII. PROTECTED INTERESTS IN LIBERTY

A. Non-Impairment of Obligations of Contracts

Background reading: Padilla IV-A CIVIL LAW 11-42 (1988)
(discussion of Art. 1306)
Art. III, Sec. 10
Civil Code Art. 1306

Home Builders and Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398

(2 Bernas 684)
Rutter v. Esteban, 93 Phil. 68
Ortigas v. Feati, 94 SCRA 533
Juarez v. CA, 214 SCRA 475
Caleon v. Agus Development, 207 SCRA 748

B. Involuntary Servitude
Art. III, Sec. 18(2)
Rubi v. Provincial Board, 39 Phil. 660
Kaisahan v. Gotamco, 80 Phil. 521

C. Imprisonment for Non-Payment of Debt

CONST. art. III, sec. 20
Lozano v. Martinez, 146 SCRA 232

D. Right Against Self-incrimination

U.S. v. Navarro, 3 Phil. 143
Villaflor v. Summers, 41 Phil. 62
People v. Vallejo, G.R. 144656, 9 May 2002
Beltran v. Samson, 53 Phil. 570
Cabal v. Kapunan, 6 SCRA 1059
Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, 203 SCRA 767
Galman v. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 294

VIII. SCOPE OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION

A. Who are entitled to Constitutional Protection

Citizenship and Alienage

7
 Board of Commissioners (CID) v. Dela Rosa et. al., 197 SCRA 853
Qua Chee Gan v. Deportation Board, 9 SCRA 27
Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago, 162 SCRA 840
Yu v. Defensor-Santiago, 169 SCRA 364
Labo v. COMELEC, 176 SCRA 1
Aznar v. COMELEC, 185 SCRA 703

Juridical Persons
Stonehill v. Diokno, supra
Central Bank v. Morfe, 20 SCRA 507

B. Who are subject to Constitutional Prohibitions

State Action Requirement

People v. Marti, 193 SCRA 57
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, supra
Borjal v. Court of Appeals, 301 SCRA 1, 23, G.R. No. 126466, Jan. 14, 1999

######