Ap Us Government Review Civil Rights And Civil Liberties Court Cases

Front 1

Marbury vs. Madison (1803)

Back 1

established precedent of federal courts using judicial review

Front 2

Dartmouth College vs. Woodward (1819)

Back 2

made the contract clause of the Constitution a powerful instrument to protect property rights against state challenges

Front 3

McCulloch vs. Maryland (1819)

Back 3

established national supremacy of the Constitution over the power of the states

Front 4

Gibbons vs. Ogden (1824)

Back 4

increased federal power over interstate commerce by implying that anything concerning interstate trade could potentially be regulated by the fed. gov.

Front 5

Barron vs. Baltimore (1833)

Back 5

determined that the Bill of Rights applied only to the nat'l gov., not the state gov.s

Front 6

Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896)

Back 6

allowed separate but equal facilities based on race

Front 7

Schenck vs. US (1919)

Back 7

clear and present danger test for free speech under First Amendment

Front 8

Gitlow vs. New York (1925)

Back 8

declared that state limits on speech and press should not exceed federal limits

Front 9

Smith vs. Allwright (1944)

Back 9

the denying of African Americans the right to vote in a primary election was found to be a violation of the 15th Amendment

Front 10

Dennis vs. United States (1951)

Back 10

found Smith Act unconstitutional; one can advocate the overthrow of the gov. as long as not actively seeking a way to do so

Front 11

Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954)

Back 11

declared school segregation unconstitutional; 'separate educational facilities are inherently unequal'

Front 12

Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas 2 (1955)

Back 12

ordered schools to desegregate 'with all due and deliberate speed'

Front 13

Mapp vs. Ohio (1961)

Back 13

established the exclusionary rule for police searches under the Fourth Amendment and that illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in a criminal trial

Front 14

Engel vs. Vitale (1962)

Back 14

prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public school through the establishment clause of the First Amendment

Front 15

Heart of Atlanta Motel vs. United States

Back 15

affirmation of power of Congress, through use of the commerce clause, to end segregation by law in the US

Front 16

Baker vs. Carr (1962)

Back 16

ordered state representative districts to be near as equal as possible: 'one man one vote'

Front 17

Abbington vs. Schempp (1963)

Back 17

prohibited devotional Bible reading by virtue of the establishment clause of the First Amendment

Front 18

Gideon vs. Wainwright (1963)

Back 18

states must provide a lawyer in a criminal trial to those who cannot afford one

Front 19

New York Times vs. Sullivan (1964)

Back 19

1st Amendment protects the publication of all statements (even false libel and slander) about the conduct of public officials except when statements are made w/ actual malice

Front 20

Griswold vs. Connecticut (1965)

Back 20

established the implied right of privacy in a birth control case through the Amendments 1,3,4,5,9,14

Front 21

Miranda vs. Arizona (1966)

Back 21

established verbal Miranda warnings (right to counsel and protection against self-incrimination) that must be given to a suspect during arrest and detention

Front 22

Epperson vs. Arkansas (1968)

Back 22

prohibited states from banning the teaching of evolution in public schools b/c that would violate the establishment clause and the free speech clause

Front 23

Brandenburg vs. Ohio (1969)

Back 23

Brandenburg made a speech at a KKK rally and was convicted under an Ohio criminal syndicism law- law was found unconstitutional since it violated right to free speech in Amendments 1 and 14

Front 24

Swann vs. Charlotte-Meckenburg (1970)

Back 24

ruled that the federal courts are constitutionally authorized to remedy state-imposed segregation w/ broad and flexible powers

Front 25

Lemon vs. Kurtzman (1971)

Back 25

established a 3-part test to determine establishment clause
1. law must have a secular purpose
2. law must neither advance nor inhibit religion
3. law must not foster excessive gov. entanglement w/ religion

Front 26

New York Times vs. United States (1971)

Back 26

the Pentagon Papers case ruled that the Nixon administration's efforts to prevent the publication- prior restraint- of what it termed 'classified information' violated the 1st Amendment

Front 27

Roe vs. Wade (1973)

Back 27

established national abortion guidelines by extending the inferred right of privacy from Griswold

Front 28

United States vs. Nixon (1974)

Back 28

the president can't claim executive privilege to withhold evidence in a criminal investigation

Front 29

Buckley vs. Valeo (1976)

Back 29

allowed legislatures to limit campaign contributions, but not how much a candidate can spend of thier own money

Front 30

U.C. Regents vs. Bakke (1978)

Back 30

eliminated strict racial quotas under affirmative action but allowed race to be one of the factors relating to admission status

Front 31

INS vs. Lopez (1984)

Back 31

Amendment 4 and exclusionary rule do not apply in deportation proceedings

Front 32

Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services (1989)

Back 32

did not overturn Roe vs. Wade, but allowed states to restrict access to abortions

Front 33

Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier (1988)

Back 33

Amendment 1 does not require schools to affirmatively promote particular types of student speech, which equated into censorship of a school paper

Front 34

Shaw vs. Reno (1993)
Miller vs. Johnson (1995)

Back 34

cannot segregate voters based on race via redrawing legislative district boundaries

Front 35

United States vs. Lopez (1995)

Back 35

finds that firearms in schools have nothing to do with interstate commerce

Front 36

Adarand vs. Pena (1995)

Back 36

presumption of disadvantage b/c of race alone w/ consequent allocation of favored treatment is discriminatory annd violates the 5th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause

Front 37

What did Adarand vs. Pena (1995) insist about the allocation of favored treatment?

Back 37

it "must serve a compelling government interest, and must be narrowly tailored to further that interest"

Front 38

Clinton vs. New York (1998)

Back 38

banned presidential use of line-item veto as a violation of legislative powers b/c it gave unconstitutional power to president

Front 39

Bush vs. Gore (2000)

Back 39

used Amendment 14's equal protection clause to stop the Florida recount; the ballots cannot be devalued by 'later arbitrary and disparate treatment'

Front 40

Atkins vs. Virginia (2002)

Back 40

death penalty for mentally retarded found unconstitutional since it violated 'cruel and unusual punishment' clause of the 8th Amendment

Front 41

Zelman vs. Simmons-Harris (2002)

Back 41

public money can be used to send disadvantaged children to private schools on voucher programs; it doesn't violate the establishment clause

Front 42

Board vs. Pottawatomie (2002)

Back 42

school districts can give random drug tests only to those students who are involved in extracurricular activities

Front 43

Ashcroft vs. ACLU (2002)

Back 43

struck down a federal ban on 'virtual' child pornography; court found it wasn't best means to protect kids b/c it covered too much protected material

Front 44

What did Ashcroft vs. ACLU feel would do just as good of a job of protecting kids?

Back 44

blocking software installed on home computers would protect kids just as well but w/out preventing free speech