Practice question
A funding program is partly invalidated. Some hospitals were completed before the ruling, and patients relied on the facilities' lawful appearance. A claimant requests both destruction of all hospitals solely because of the ruling and automatic conviction of every implementing officer. The officers respond that the program's benefits make all challenged transfers valid. Which analysis is sound?
- Both sides are correct because effects and validity are identical.
- The hospitals must be destroyed, but all officers are immune.
- The program becomes constitutional once patients use a hospital.
- Preservation of appropriate effects may be justified, while constitutional invalidity and individual liability remain distinct questions.
- No court may examine any consequence of the program.
Legal references
- Araullo v. Aquino III, G.R. No. 209287 et al., February 3, 2015 Resolution, sections 6–7, https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/feb2015/gr_209287_2015.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.