1

Roberts was the Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of a shipping corporation. He was subpoenaed (ordered to be a witness in a court proceeding) at a trial regarding a shipping dispute with a supplier. The subpoena required Roberts to produce corporate records. Roberts wants to refuse to produce the corporate records because they show that he has misused funds by spending lavishly on expensive presents for his mistress. Can he assert his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination? Can Roberts successfully refuse to deliver the corporate records? Why or why not? If his wife sees this evidence, he’s toast!

2

Members of the Old Order Mennonite Church have traditionally used horses and buggies for transportation. They began using tractors about 40 years ago, especially for hauling agricultural products to market. To ensure that the tractors are not used to displace horses and buggies, the Church rules require steel cleats that slow the speed of the tractors to be attached to the wheels of all tractors driven by church members. To minimize damage to the road from these cleats, the Order made them larger and mounted them on rubber belts, but in 2009, after determining that the cleats were damaging newly resurfaced roads, Mitchell County, Iowa, passed an ordinance providing that, “No tire on a vehicle moved on a highway is allowed to have any block, stud, flange, cleat or spike or any other protuberances of any material other than rubber.”
Zimmerman, a Menonite, continued to operate his tractor on the road with the steel cleats attached to the tires and was cited for violating the ordinance. Zimmerman argued that the law violated his First Amendment right to free exercise of his religion. Did the County government’s ordinance violate Mr. Zimmerman’s rights? Are there any other issues that should be balanced against this individual’s freedom of religious practice? How do you think the court should decide this case? Why?

3

Darlene Smith is 72 years old, a widow, and in poor health. Her income is limited to her social security benefits which are $1,400.00 per month. She lives in subsidized housing and pays $300.00 per month rent. She also receives vouchers (food stamps) to help her pay for her groceries each month. The Iowa Legislature just adjusted the income limit to qualify for food stamps and Darlene would no longer qualify for this benefit. The new law has some exceptions that allow recipients to continue to receive assistance if they have underlying medical conditions. The State of Iowa is anxious to implement this new law and has installed a computer program that cuts off any individual receiving $1,400.00 or more per month. The program is not sophisticated enough to allow for the health exception in the law. Darlene is depending on those vouchers for October. Can the State of Iowa just cut Darlene off from her assistance? What does due process require?