• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/33

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

33 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

The ruling made it possible for the New York Times and Washington Post newspapers to publish the then-classified Pentagon Papers without risk of government censorship or punishment.

New York Times vs U.S

1961 supreme court decision ruling that the 14th amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures must be extended to the states

Mapp vs Ohio

Convicted man for publishing a communist publication that made an at attempt to overthrow the government. The case applied incorporation to the states, and expanded speech protections of individuals.

Gitlow v New York

1963 supreme court decision holding that anyone, however poor, accused of a felony where imprisonment may be imposed has a right to a lawyer

Gideon v Wainwright

1973 Supreme court decision holding that community standards be used to determine whether material is obscene in terms of appealing to a "prurient interest" and being "patently offensive" and lacking in value

Miller v California

1989 case in whcih the supreme court struck down a law banning the burning of the american flag on the grounds that such action was symbolic speech protected by the first amendment

Texas v Johnson

1919 supreme court decision upholding the conviction of a socialist who had urged resistance to the draft during WW1. Justice holems declared that government can limit speech if the speech provokes a "Clear and present danger" of substantive evils

Schenck v U.S

1966 supreme court decision that sets guidelines for police questioning of accused persons to protect them against self-incrimination and to protect their right to counsel

Miranda v Arizona

1971 supreme court decision that established that aid to church related schools must...1. have a secular legislative purpose (non religious)2. have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion3. not foster excessive government entanglement with religion

Lemon v Kurtzman

Shows that students still have rights under a school zone that cannot be violated unless it causes a disruption in the school

Tinker v Des Moines

1962 supreme court decision holding that state officials violated the first amendment when they wrote a prayer to be recited by New York's school children

Engel v Vitale

The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the 2nd Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment and applies to the states.

McDonald v Chicago

The 1976 Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty, stating, "It is an extreme sanction, suitable to the most extreme of crimes." The court did not, therefore, believe that the death sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

Gregg v Georgia

the supreme court ruling that the due process clause of the 14th amendment does not require those the states to observe the double jeopardy guarantee of the 5th amendment


Therefore protection against double jeopardy under the 5th amendment was not a fundamental right

Palko v Connecticut

The 1st Amendment does not protect fighting words which could lead to injury of breach of peace

Chaplinsky v New Hampshire

The Court held that the Arkansas statute forbidding the teaching of evolution in public learning institutions was contrary to the freedom of religion mandate of the First Amendment, and was also in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Epperson v Arkansas

1964; established guidelines for determining whether public officials and public figures could win damage suits for libel. To do so, individuals must prove that the defamatory statements were made w/ "actual malice" and reckless disregard for the truth

New York Times v Sullivan

A man was arrested for being addicted to heroine, but was not found with any during the arrest. The Court ruled than no one can be arrested for having the illness of addiction to an illegal substance. Cruel and Unusual Punishment Incorporated.

Robinson v California

1931 supreme court decision holding that the first amendment protects newspapers from prior restraint

Near v Minnesota

Religious speech is protected, even from door to door, and cannot be regulated, as it would violate the 1st and 14th amendments

Cantwell v Connecticut

Displaying the 10 commandments violates the establishment clause since it advances a particular religion


Van Orden- Overturned, ruled that even though the 10 commandments are displayed, they represent historical meaning in that context and don't violate the establishment clause.

McCreary COunty v ACLU of Kentucky

Established a reasonable suspicion rule for school searches


The exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment applies to searches and seizures conducted by school officials in public schools.

New Jersey vs TLO

Ruled on the subject of free press, and established that reporters must testify based on their sources in federal court.

Branzburg v Hayes

Based on reasonable suspicion, search measures used by school officials must be "reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction."

Safford Unified School District v Redding


You do not have the right under the 1st Amendment to exercise free speech, publication and assembly if the exercise involved the creation of a plot to overthrow the government.

Dennis v United States

Execution by lethal injection would not violate the 8th Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Death penalty ruled constitutional.

Baze v Rees

1st Amendments rights weren't violated because "schools may take steps to safeguard those entrusted to their care from speech that can reasonably be regarded as encouraging illegal drug use.

Morse v Frederick

Did not allow a federal ban on virtual child pornography. Ruled that Communications Decency Act unconst. b/c it was too broad and vague in regulating Internet speech

Ashcroft v ACLU

Changed Miranda v. Arizona. Now in order to "remain silent" an arrested person must say they are going to remain silent. Also, police no longer have to read you the Miranda rights during an arrest, the only time you will be read your rights is before an interrogation.

Berghuis v Thompkins

Restricted mentally retarded people to be executed

Atkins v Virginia

Minors cannot be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole for non-murder cases.

Graham v Florida

Determined that prisoners of war had a right to habeas corpus


terrorism suspects have the constitutional rights to challenge their detentions in court.


Enemy Combatants have the right to know what they are accused of and refute

Boumediene v Bush

The use of GPS for 24 hr surveillance was an unconstitutional violation of our 4th amendment

United States v Jones