Law
A federal statute appropriated $7 million for a nationwide essay contest on "How the US Can Best Stop Drug Abuse." The statute indicates that its purpose is to generate new, practical ideas for eliminating drug abuse in the US. Contest rules set forth in the statute provide that winning essays are to be selected on the basis of the originality, apples, and feasibility of their ideas. The statute expressly authorized as a first prize of $1 million, 50 second prizes of $100,000 each, and 103rd prizes of $10,000 each. It also states the judges for the contest or to be appointed by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate, and that all residents of the US who are not employees of the federal government are eligible to enter to win the contest. A provision of the statute authorizes any taxpayer of the US to challenge its constitutionality. In a suit by a federal tax pair to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, the court should(a) refuse to decide its merits, because the suit involves policy questions that are inherently political and, therefore, non-justiciable(b) hold the statute unconstitutional, because it does not provide sufficient guidelines for awarding the prize money appropriated by Congress and, therefore, unconstitutionally delegates legislative power to the contest judges(c) hold the statute unconstitutional come because its relationship to legitimate purposes of the spending power of Congress is too tenuous and conjectural to satisfy the necessary improper clause of Article I(d) hold the statute unconstitutional, because it is reasonably related to the general welfare, it states concrete objectives, and it provides adequate criteria for conducting the essay contest in awarding the prize money