No Smoking Ban and Constitutional Rights Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

No Smoking Ban and Constitutional Rights - Essay Example ate Health & Welfare Department because of her being a smoker notwithstanding the fact that she is well qualified for the position she was applying for. The refusal of the said department to hire her was because of the law enacted by the State that no employees shall be hired as state employees; (2) The issues involved must be riped for adjudication (Warth vs. Seldin, 1975). That is, the questioned law must have effected an adverse effect on the person challenging it that there it has warrant the intervention of the judiciary; (3) The plaintiff must have a legal standing. This is when the plaintiff has a personal and substantial interest in the current case such that he has sustained direct or actual injury due to the enforcement of the subject law, that there is a sufficient connection between the action of the government and the injury sustained by the plaintiff or that the plaintiff does not bring the case for general purpose or to represent a third party (Flast vs. Cohen, 1968). Clearly, Candice suffered injury for being rejected to become a state employee despite her qualifications; and (4) The question of Constitutionality must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity or it must pass mootness test (The Free Dictionary; Warth vs. Seldin, 1975). If the case shows that the issues involved are only hypothetical or dead, the court will preclude itself from addressing the issues since the â€Å"alleged injury† is no longer or has never existed. In the instant case, should the case has been brought right after Candice was rejected to become a state employee and while she is still a smoker, the case can be considered to have been brought in time and therefore meets the last requisite. In this instance, all the requisites before a court may review a law and declare it to be unconstitutional or in violation of a fundamental right are present in the case at hand. Moreover, the test used was appropriate since the case questions the validity of a law and the test was