(1) Is the Maryland character fitness test unconstitutionally vague
because it leaves the triers of fact free to decide, without any legally
fixed standards, what is and what is not morally acceptable in each
particular case?

(2) The Supreme Court has held that when a bar applicant is denied
admission and there is no basis for finding the applicant fails to meet
the qualifications required to practice law that applicant is denied due
process of law. The Board of Law Examiners reported that Solon
lacked the requisite moral character for admission, but the record is
void of any behavior that would lead a reasonable person to reach this
conclusion. Did Maryland violate Solon 's due process of law by
denying him admission when there was no rational basis for the
denial?

(3) The Constitution requires a State to afford all individuals an
opportunity to be heard on matters impacting life, liberty, and
property in order to fulfill the promise of the Due Process Clause.
Maryland denied Solon the privilege to practice law on specific issues
which it never afforded Solon an opportunity to address. Did
Maryland violate Solon 's due process rights?

(4) The Supreme Court has held that any State act permitting a delay
without limit is unconstitutional. The Maryland State Board of Law
Examiners held Solon 's bar application open for nearly four years
without any explanation for the delay. Was this unexplained delay
unconstitutional?

Is the Maryland character fitness test unconstitutionally vague?