Lyceum of the Philippines College of Law

Constitutional Law II 2nd Semester AY 2019-2020

Atty. Roderick C. Rosas

A. THE CONSTITUTION AND THE COURTS

1. Requisites of Judicial Inquiry

1.a. Actual case

• Lawyers Against Monopoly and Poverty v. Secretary of Budget and
Management, G.R. No. 164987, April 24, 2012, 670 SCRA 201.
• Senate v. Ermita, G.R. No. 169777, April 20, 2006, 488 SCRA 1.
• Pimentel v. Aguirre, G.R. 132988, July 19, 2000, 336 SCRA 201.
• The Province of North Cotabato v. The Government of the Republic of the
Philippines Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain, G.R. 183591, October 14,
2008, 568 SCRA 402.
• Madriaga v. China Banking Corporation, G.R. No. 192377, July 25, 2012,
677 SCRA 560.
• Garcillano v. House of Representatives, December 23, 2008, 575 SCRA 170.
• Hacienda Luisita Incorporated v. Luisita Industrial Park Corporation, G.R.
No. 171101, July 5, 2001, 660 SCRA 130.
• Javier v. Commission on Elections, 144 SCRA 194.
o Exemption to Mootness case
• Arroyo v. Department of Justice, G.R. No. 199082, September 18, 2012, 681
SCRA 181.

1.b. Proper party

• Stronghold Insurance Company v. Cuenca, G.R. NO. 173297, March 6, 2013,
692 SCRA 473.
• Topacio v. Ong, G.R. No. 179895, December 18, 2008, 574 SCRA 817.
• Custodio v. Senate President, 42 O.G. 243.
• David v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006, 489 SCRA 161.
• Mamba v. Lara, G.R. No. 165109, December 14, 2009, 608 SCRA 149.
• Tolentino v. Comelec, 41 SCRA 702.
• Kilosbayan, Inc. v. Guingona, 235 SCRA 630 (1994).
• Kilosbayan v. Morato, 246 SCRA 540 (1995).
• Guazon v. De Villa, 181 SCRA 623 (1990).
* Moot Cases 1
** Active Cases
 • Integrated Bar of the Philippines v. Zamora, 338 SCRA 81.
• AKBAYAN v. Aquino, 562 SCRA 251 (2008).
• Biraogo v. Philippine Truth Commission of 2010, G.R. No. 192935, December
7, 2010
•
1.c. Earliest opportunity - Hacienda Luisita Incorporated v. Luisita Industrial
Park Corporation, G.R. No. 171101, July 5, 2001, 660 SCRA 130.

1.d. Necessity of deciding constitutional question

• Alvarez v. PICOP Resources, Inc., G.R. No. 162243, November 29, 2006, 508
SCRA 498
• Rayo v. Metropolitan Bank, Inc., G.R. No. 165142, December 10, 2007, 539
SCRA 571.
• Demetria v. Alba, G.R. No. 719977, February 27, 1987, 148 SCRA 208

2. Various tests applied in constitutional challenges

• Concurring opinion of Justice Leonardo-De Castro in JESUS C. GARCIA vs.
THE HONORABLE RAY ALAN T. DRILON, et al., G.R. No. 179267, June 25,
2013
• People vs. Vera, et al., G.R. NO. L-45685, November 16, 1937
• Spark vs. Quezon City, et al. G.R. No. 225442, August 8, 2017
• Chavez v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 168338, February 15, 2008

B. THE BILL OF RIGHTS

1. Due Process Clause: Constitution ART III, Sec 1

1.a. Definition and Hierarchy

• PBM Employees v. PBM, 51 SCRA 189 (2 Bernas 423)

• Ermita Malate Hotel, Motel Assoc. v. City of Manila, 20 SCRA 849 (2 Bernas
34)

1.b. Who Are Protected

• Smith Bell Co. v. Natividad, 40 Phil 163
• Villegas v. HuiChiong, G.R. 112801

1.c. Meaning

* Moot Cases 2
** Active Cases
 Life

• Teodoro v. Manalo, G.R. No. 186050 (2011)

• Pestaño v. GRP-Human Rights Committee, CCPR/C/98/D/1619/2007
• When Does Life Begin, Records of, R.C.C. No. 85 09-17-1986&
• 1986 Constitutional Commission Proceedings, R.C.C. No. 86 09-18-1986
• The Rule on the Writ of Amparo, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC
• Burgos v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 183711
• Gadian v. Ibrado, G.R. No. 187652 & CA-G.R. SP No. 00034
• Buck v. Bell, 274 US 200

Liberty - Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, 39 Phil 660

Property - Terrace v. Thompson, 263 US 197

1.d. Exclusion

• Nunez v. Averia, 57 SCRA 726

• Crespo v. Provincial Board, 16 SCRA 66
• JMM Promotion v. CA, G.R. No. 120095 1996
• Pedro v. Rizal, G.R. No. 34163
• Libanan v. Sandiganbayan, 233 SCRA 163

2. Aspects of Due Process

2.a. Police Power

• Kwong sing v. City of Manila, 41 Phil 103
• Yu Eng Cong v. Trinidad, 271 US 500
• Layno v. Sandiganbayan, 136 SCRA 536
• Deloso v. Sandiganbayan, 173 SCRA 409

2.b. Procedural

Impartial Court

• Javier v. COMELEC, 144 SCRA 194

• Galman v. Sandiganbayan, 144 SCRA 43
• Marcos v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 126995 (1998)
• Rivera v. Civil Service, 240 SCRA 43
* Moot Cases 3
** Active Cases
 • Banco Español Filipino v. Palanca, 37 Phil. 921 (2 Bernas 4)
• Ang Tibay v. CIR, 69 Phil. 635 (2 Bernas 6)
• PHILCOMSAT v. Alcuaz, 180 SCRA 218 (2 Bernas 8)
• Ateneo v. CA, 145 SCRA 106
• Alcuaz v. PSBA, 161 SCRA 7
• Non v. Judge Dames, 185 SCRA 523 (2 Bernas 14)
• Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 US 254 (1970)
• Bell v. Burson, 402 US 535 (1971)
• UP v. Hon. Ligot-Telan, 227 SCRA 342
• DBP v. NLRC, 183 SCRA 328
• Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 369 SCRA 394
• Reyes v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207264

Jurisdiction

• Ynot v. IAC, 148 SCRA 659 (2 Bernas 21)

• Eastern Broadcasting v. Dans, 137 SCRA 628 (2 Bernas 261)
• Tatad v. Sandiganbayan, 159 SCRA 70
• Gonzales v. SCS, 226 SCRA 66

2.c. “Old” Substantive Due Process: Protection for Property Interests

• Calder v. Bull, 3 US (3 Dall.) 386 (1978)

• Lochner v. New York, 198 US 48 (1905)
• People v. Pomar, 46 Phil 440
• Pakistan International Airlines v. Ople, 190 SCRA 90 (1990)
• NDC and AGRIX v. Phil Veterans, 192 SCRA 257 (2 Bernas 48)
• People v. Nazario, 165 SCRA 182 (2 Bernas 41)
• Balacuit v. CFI, 163 SCRA 182 (2 Bernas 41)
• Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195 (2 Bernas 43)

2.d. “New” Substantive Due Process: Protection for “Liberty” interests in Privacy

o Warren and Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 Harv. L. Rev. 193 (1890)
o Cortes I., Constitutional Foundations of Privacy, in Emerging Trends in Law
(1983), pp 1-70

• Olmstead v. US (Brandeis Dissent)*, 277 US 438

• Skinner v. Oklahoma*, 316 US 535 (1942)
• Griswold v. Connecticut*, 381 US 479 (1965)
* Moot Cases 4
** Active Cases
 • Eisenstatd v. Baird*, 405 US 438
• Poe v. Ullman*, 367 US 479
• Roe v. Wade*, 410 US 113 (1973)
• Bowers and Hardwick, 106 S. Ct. 2841 (1986)
• Lawrence v. Texas* 02-0102 (26 June 2003)
• US v. Windsor* 570 U.S. ___ (2013)
• Board of Education v. Earls, 01-332 (27 June 2002)
• Ople v. Torres, 141 SCRA 293
• Bayan Muna v. Ermita, G.R. No. 167930 (2006)
• Duncan Assoc v. Glaxo Welcome*, G.R. 162994, (17 September 2004)
• David v. Arroyo, 489 SCRA 160
• Pollo v. Constantino-David, et al., G.R. No. 181881, October 18, 2011

2.e. Protected Interests in Property

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

Churchill v. Rafferty 32 Phil 580 (2 Bernas 26)

US v. Toribio 15 Phil 85 (2 Bernas 19)
Constitution ART III, sec. 9
People v. Fajardo 100 Phil 443 (2 Bernas 639)
Ynot v. CA supra
US v. Causby 328 US 256 (2 Bernas 636)
Republic v. PLDT 26 SCRA 620 (2 Bernas 639)
Republic v. Castelvi 58 SCRA 336 (2 Bernas 627)
Bel-Air Association v. IAC 176 SCRA 719

EPZA v. Dulay 149 SCRA 305 (2 Bernas 655)

NPC v. CA 129 SCRA 665 (2 Bernas 655)
RA 8974, Villar Law on the Zoning Value of Land

“Takings” under Eminent Domain versus “Takings” under the Social Justice Clause
De Knecht v. Bautista 100 SCRA 660 (2 Bernas 666)
Republic v. De Knecht 182 SCRA 441 (2 Bernas 671)
Manotok v. NHA 150 SCRA 89 (2 Bernas 674)
Ermita Malate Hotel Association v. City of Manila supra

Constitution ART III, sec 1 and 4

Assoc. of Small Landowners v. Sec. of DAR 175 SCRA 343 (2 Bernas 990)
* Moot Cases 5
** Active Cases
 Sumulong v. Guerrero 154 SCRA 461 (2 Bernas 650)
City Government v. Judge Ericta 122 SCRA 759 (2 Bernas 631)
Luz Farms v. Secretary 192 SCRA 51 (2 Bernas 1101)
Cariday v. CA (Guttierez J, Dissenting) 176 SCRA 31
RA 7279, Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992, March 24, 1992

I. Equal Protection Clause

Constitution ART III, sec 1

Constitution ART II, sec 14 and 22
Constitution ART IV
Constitution ART XII, sec 2 and 14.2

Ormoc Sugar Company, Inc. v. Treasurer of Ormoc City 22 SCRA 603 (2 Bernas
78)
Dumlao v. COMELEC 96 SCRA 392 (2 Bernas 72)

People v. Cayat 68 Phil 12 (2 Bernas 58)

Ichong v. Hernandez 101 Phil 1155 (2 Bernas 61)
Korematsu v. US 323 US 214 (1944)
The Civil Liberties Act of 1988 102 Stat. 904, 50a U.S.C. § 1989b et se
(Presidential Medal of Freedom to Fred Korematsu by Bill Clinton)
Plessy v. Ferguson 163 US 537 (1896)
University of California v. Bakke 438 US 265 (1978)
Gratz v. Bollinger 539 U.S. 244 (2003)
Grutter v. Bollinger 539 U.S. 244 (2003)
Bradwell v. Illinois 83 US 103 (1873)
Goesart v. Cleary 335 US 464 (1948) (2 Bernas 76)
Geduldig v. Aiello 417 US 484 (1974)
Mississippi Univ. School for Women v. Hogan 458 US 718 (1982)
Michael M. v. Superior Court 450 US 464 (1981)
Personnel Administrator v. Feeney 442 US 256 (1979)
YickWo v. Hopkins 118 US 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 1983)

International School Alliance v. Quisumbing 33 SCRA 14 (June 2000)

Board of Directors v. Rotary Club* 481 US 537
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale* No. 99-699 (28 June 2000)
* Moot Cases 6
** Active Cases
 Sombilon v. Romulo, G.R. 176051 (2009)

Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health 440 Mass 309, 793 NE 2d 941 (18 Nov
2003)
Tecson v. COMELEC G.R. No. 161434 (2004)
Garcia v. Hon. Drilon* G.R. No. 179267 (June 25, 2013)

II. Freedom of Expression: Constitution ART III, sec 4

A. Protected Speech

Prior Restraint
Near v. Minnesota 238 US 697 (2 Bernas 238)
New York Times v. US 403 US 713 (2 Bernas 243)
Freedman v. Maryland 380 US 551 (2 Bernas 251)
Chavez v. Gonzales G.R. No. 168338
Estrada v. Desierto G.R. Nos. 146710-15,
March 2, 2001

Subsequent Punishment
People v. Perez 45 Phil 599 (2 Bernas 288)
Dennis v. US 341 US 494 (2 Bernas 290)
Abrams v. US 250 US 616 (1919)
Eastern Broadcasting v. Dans supra

“Speech Plus”: Symbolic Speech

US v. O'Brien 391 US 367 (1968)
Tinker v. Des Moines School District 393 US 503 (1969)
Texas v. Johnson 491 US 397 (1989)

Assembly and Petition

Primicias v. Fugoso (Hilado, Dissent) 80 Phil 78
Navarro v. Villegas 31 SCRA 731 (2 Bernas 423)
PBM Employees v. PBM 51 SCRA 189 (2 Bernas 425)
JBL Reyes v. Bagatsing 125 SCRA 553 (2 Bernas 430)
Malabanan v. Ramento 129 SCRA 359 (2 Bernas 437)
IBP Cadiz, Roque, Butuyan v. Atienza, G.R. No. 172591

Free Speech and Suffrage

* Moot Cases 7
** Active Cases
 Gonzalez v. COMELEC G.R. No. L-27833, April 18,
1969, 27 SCRA 835 (2 Bernas 296)
Sandidad v. COMELEC 181 SCRA 529 (2 Bernas 304)
National Press Club v. COMELEC 207 SCRA 1 (2 Bernas 307)
Adiong v. COMELEC 207 SCRA 712 (2 Bernas 317)
Bayan v. Ermita G.R. No. 168338

Use of Private Property as a forum for others’ Speech

Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robbins 447 US 74 (1980)

B. Unprotected Speech

Defamatory Speech

Pre-Sullivan in Philippine Jurisprudence

Policarpio v. Manila Times 5 SCRA 148 (2 Bernas 343)
Lopez v. CA 34 SCRA 116 (2 Bernas 345)
US v. Bustos 37 Phil 371

Sullivan
New York Times v. Sullivan
Rosenbloom v. Metromedia
Garrison v. Louisiana
Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts
In Re: IML v. Utah
376 US 254 (2 Bernas 350)
403 US 29 (2 Bernas 355)
379 US 64
388 US 130
No. 20010159 (15 Nov 2002)

Sullivan in Philippine Jurisprudence

Borjal v. CA 301 SCRA 1
Vasquez v. CA G.R. No. 118971 (1999)
Guingguing v. CA 471 SCRA 196
Soliven v. Makasiar 167 SCRA 394 (2 Bernas 147)
Ayer Production v. Judge Capulong 160 SCRA 865 (2 Bernas 254

Reversion to Pre-Sullivan in Philippine Jurisprudence

Fermin v. People G.R. No. 157643 (2008)
Diaz v. People G.R. No. 159787 (2007)

Disini vs. Secretary of Justice G.R. No. 203335,

February 18, 2014

Atty. Fortun vs. Prima Quinsayas, et al., G.R. No. 194578

* Moot Cases 8
** Active Cases
 February 13, 2013

PRIMA JESUSA B. QUINSAYAS,

Libel in UN Human Rights Committee

Adonis v. The Philippines CCPR/C/103/D/1815/2008

Supreme Court and Freedom of Speech

In Re Jurado
In Re Macasaet

“Fighting Words”, Offensive Words

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire 315 US 568 (1942)
Cohen v. California 403 US 15 (1971)
MVRS v. Islamic Da’wah of the Philippines G.R. No. 80892 (1989)
Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox

Obscenity
Roth v. US 354 US 476 (1957)
Miller v. California 37 L. Ed. 2d 419 (1973) (2
Bernas 368)
Gonzalez v. Kalaw Katigbak 137 SCRA 717 (2 Bernas 377)
Pita v. CA 178 SCRA 362 (2 Bernas 381)
Reno v. ACLU 521 US 844 (26 June 1997)
Ashcroft v. ACLU No. 00-1293 (13 May 2002)
Regina v. Hicklin L.R. 3 Q.B. 360 (1868)

Privacy
Hannover v. Germany* [2004] EMLR 379; (2005) 40 EHRR 1
Campbell v. Mirror Group Newspapers* [2004] UKHL 22

III. Church and State: The Wall of Separation

Constitution ART II, sec 6

Constitution ART III, sec 5
Constitution ART VI, sec 29(2)

Establishment Clause
Aglipay v. Ruiz 63 Phil 201 (2 Bernas 444)
Garces v. Estenzo 104 SCRA 510 (2 Bernas 446)
* Moot Cases 9
** Active Cases
 Lemon v. Kurtzman 403 US 602 (2 Bernas 464)
Board of Education v. Allen 392 US 236 (2 Bernas 459)
County of Allegheny v. ACLU 57 LW 5045 (2 Bernas 482)
Lynch v. Donnely 465 US 668 (1984)
Epperson v. Arkansas 393 US 97 (1968)
School District v. Schempp 374 US 203 (2 Bernas 449)
Engel v. Vitale 370 US 421 (1962)
Tilton v. Richardson 403 US 672 (2 Bernas 470)

Newdow v. US Congress No. 00-16423, 9th Cir., June 26, 2002

(amended Feb 28, 2003)
Glassroth v. Moore 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2003)
Martin v. Corporation of the Presiding Bishop 434 Mass. 141, 727 N.E. 2d 131

Free Exercise Clause

American Bible Society v. City
Gerona v. Secretary of Education*
Ebralinag v. Division Superintendent*
Newdow v. US Congress
Anucension v. NLU
Iglecia ni Cristo v. CA
Pamil v. Teleron
McDaniel v. Paty
German v. Barangan
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Commonwealth v. Twitchell
101 Phil 386 (2 Bernas 515)
106 Phil 2 (2 Bernas 518)
219 SCRA 256 (2 Bernas 518)
00-16423 (26 June 2002)
80 SCRA 350
259 SCRA 529 (26 July 1996)
86 SCRA 413 (2 Bernas 533)
435 US 618 (2 Bernas 542)
135 SCRA 514
310 US 163 (2 Bernas 512)
416 Mass. 114 (1993)

Cassius Clay v. US 403 US 698 (1971)

Estrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006 (but see also A.M. No. P-02-
1651, August 4, 2003)

Unusual Religious Beliefs and Practices

Wisconsin v. Yoder 406 US 205 (2 Bernas 524)
US v. Ballard 380 US 163 (1965)
US v. Seeger 380 US 163 (1965)
Clay v. US supra

IV. Academic Freedom

* Moot Cases 10
** Active Cases
 Background Reading: Byrne, Academic Freedom: A “Special Concern” of the First
Amendment, 99 Yale L.J. 25 (1989)

Constitution ART XIV, sec 1 and 5(2)

Garcia v. Faculty Admission Committee 68 SCRA 277 (2 Bernas 1076)
Isabelo v. Perpetual Help 227 SCRA 591
Reyes v. CA 194 SCRA 402 (2 Bernas 1084)
UP v. CA 218 SCRA 728 (9 February 1993)
DECS v. San Diego 180 SCRA 534 (2 Bernas 1054)
Tablarin v. Gutierrez 154 SCRA 730
Non v. Judge Dames supra
Alcuaz v. PSBA supra

V. Protected Interests in Liberty

A. Non-Impairment of Obligations and Contracts

Background Reading: Padilla IV-A CIVIL LAW 11-42 (1988) Discussion of ART 1306

Constitution ART III, sec 10

Civil Code ART 1306
Home Builders and Loan Association v. Blaisdell 290 US 398 (2 Bernas 684)
Rutter v. Esteban 93 Phil 68 (2 Bernas 690)
Ortigas v. Feati 94 SCRA 533 (2 Bernas 702
Juarez v. CA 214 SCRA 475 (2 Bernas 706)
Caleon v. Agus Development 207 SCRA 748

B. Involuntary Servitude
Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro supra
Kaisahan v. Gotamco 80 Phil 521

C. Imprisonment for Non-Payment of Debt

Constitution ART III, sec 20
Lozano v. Martinez 146 SCRA 323 (2 Bernas 876)

D. Right Against Self-Incrimination

US v. Navarro 3 Phil 143 (2 Bernas 844)
Villaflor v. Summers 41 Phil 62 (2 Bernas 848)
Beltran v. Samson 53 Phil 570 (2 Bernas 851)
Cabal v. Kapunan 6 SCRA 1059 (2 Bernas 861)
Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee 203 SCRA 767
* Moot Cases 11
** Active Cases
 Galman v. Pamaran 138 SCRA 294

E. Unlawful Search and Seizure

Stonehill v. Diokno 20 SCRA 383 (2 Bernas 120)
Katz v. US 394 US 347
Terry v. Ohio** 392 US 1
People v. Marti

Nala v. Barroso Jr, G.R. No. 153087 August 7, 2003

Lim v. Felix** 194 SCRA 292
Alvarez v. CFI 64 Phil 33
Bache & Co. v. Ruiz 37 SCRA 823
Burgos, Sr. v. Chief of Staff 133 SCRA 800
Roan v. Gonzales 145 SRA 687

Nolasco v. Pano 39 SCRA 152, 147 SCRA 509

People v. Malmstedt** 198 SCRA 401
People v. Aminudin ** 163 SCRA 402
People v. Burgos 144 SCRA 1
Chimel v. California 395 US 752
Manalili v. Court of Appeals** G.R. No. 113447 October 9, 1997, 280 SCRA 400
Malacat v. Court of Appeals ** 283 SCRA 159
Papa v. Mago 22 SCRA 657
People v. Aruta** 288 SCRA 620

Aniag v. COMELEC** 237 SCRA 424

Valmonte v. de Villa 178 SCRA 211, 185 SCRA 665

In Re Umil et al v. Ramos 187 SCRA 311

People v. Mengote 210 SCRA 174
People v. Manlulu 22 April SCRA 159

VI. Scope of Constitutional Protection

A. Who Are Entitled to Constitutional Protection

Citizenship and Alienage

Constitution ART IV
Board of Commissioners (CID) v. Dela Rosa, et al 197 SCRA 853
Qua Chee Gan v. Deportation Board 9 SCRA 27
* Moot Cases 12
** Active Cases
 Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago 162 SCRA 840 (2 Bernas 210)
Yu v. Defensor-Santiago 169 SCRA 364 (2 Bernas 945)
Labo v. COMELEC 176 SCRA 1 (2 Bernas 952)
Aznar v. COMELEC 185 SRA 703 (2 Bernas 957)

Juridical Persons
Stonehill v. Diokno, supra
Central Bank v. Morfe 20 SCRA 507 (2 Bernas 957)

B. Who Are Subject to Constitutional Prohibitions

State Action Requirement

People v. Marti 193 SRA 57 (2 Bernas 226)
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robbins supra
In relation to. Borjal v. CA supra

* Moot Cases 13
** Active Cases