Practice question
A claimant argues that acceptance of a facial challenge to one expression-related phrase necessarily requires nullification of an entire lengthy statute without examining the rest. Which response follows Calleja’s approach?
- Every permitted facial claim invalidates the entire enactment
- The court may never sever a phrase
- The permissible scope of review and the provisions actually invalidated must be examined; partial facial relief is not automatic whole-statute invalidation
- The claimant may choose the result without analysis
- Every unchallenged provision becomes unconstitutional by association
Legal references
- Calleja v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 252578 et al., December 7, 2021, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/dec2021/gr_252578_2021.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.