benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1083 / To improve the quality of rental housing within its boundaries, a city proposed…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

To improve the quality of rental housing within its boundaries, a city proposed an ordinance requiring all new and existing rental housing units to provide at least one full bathroom for each bedroom, plumbing and electrical hookups for a washer and dryer, and a covered parking space. A majority of the owners of existing rental housing in the city opposed the ordinance. They argued that it would dramatically decrease the number of lowincome rental housing units because owners would be unable to raise rents enough to recoup the investment required to comply. Without denying these contentions, the city enacted the ordinance. A plaintiff who owns low-income rental housing has sued the city, claiming only that the ordinance is unconstitutional on its face. Which of the following best states the burden of persuasion in this action?

category

law

options

  1. The plaintiff must demonstrate that there is no rational relationship between the ordinance and any legitimate state interest, because the ordinance regulates economic activity of a type normally presumed to be within state regulatory authority.
  2. The plaintiff must demonstrate that the ordinance does not serve a significant public interest, because it adversely affects low-income individuals.
  3. The plaintiff must demonstrate that the ordinance is not proportionate to the intended public benefit, because it imposes a financial burden on property owners.
  4. The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is necessary to serve a compelling state interest, because it adversely affects the fundamental right of rental housing owners to use their property in the manner they deem most economically efficient.
  5. The city must demonstrate that the ordinance does not violate the rights of the property owners, because it regulates the use of their property.
  6. The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is necessary to improve the standard of living within its jurisdiction, because it regulates housing conditions.
  7. The city must prove that the ordinance has a rational basis, because it impacts economic activity within its jurisdiction.
  8. The plaintiff must demonstrate that there is no substantial relationship between the ordinance and the city's goal of improving housing quality, because it may result in fewer low-income housing options.
  9. The plaintiff must demonstrate that the ordinance is not substantially related to an important state interest, because it requires some owners of rental housing to invest money that they will not be able to recoup from increased rents.
  10. The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is necessary to serve a compelling state interest, because it will have a substantial and disproportionate negative impact on low-income persons.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

upstream_id / Original problem ID
1083
task_id
e6e38c92-33c8-5852-b292-926a9343f4d6
task_key
default--test--1083
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import