Case List For Political Science

Front 1

Marbury V Madison

Back 1

Judicial Review

Front 2

Fletcher V Peck

Back 2

The Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibited Georgia from voiding contracts for the transfer of land, even though they were secured through illegal bribery

Front 3

McCulloch V Maryland

Back 3

The Constitution grants to Congress implied powers for implementing the Constitution's express powers, in order to create a functional national government.
State action may not impede valid constitutional exercises of power by the Federal government.

Front 4

Dartmouth College V Woodward

Back 4

the application of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution to private corporations. The case arose when the president of Dartmouth College was deposed by its trustees, leading to the New Hampshire legislature attempting to force the College to become a pubic institution and thereby place the ability to appoint trustees in the hands of the governor. The Supreme Court upheld the sanctity of the original charter of the College, which pre-dated the creation of the State.

Front 5

Gibbons v Ogden

Back 5

case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the power to regulate interstate commerce was granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

Front 6

Barron v Baltimore

Back 6

Bill of Rights does not apply to the states

Front 7

Schenck v United States

Back 7

Established the "clear and present danger test"

Front 8

Gitlow V New York

Back 8

Partially repealed Barron v Baltimore and wrote that the Bill of Rights applies to the state as well as the fed

Front 9

Near v Minnesota

Back 9

Gave further freedom for freedom of the press. Targeted Malicious newspapers and SC ruled against Minnesota

Front 10

Mapp v Ohio

Back 10

Evidence entered in from illegally searched and seizured will be revoked.

Front 11

West Virgina v Barnette

Back 11

Students are not forced to say the pledge of allegiance

Front 12

Everson v Board of Education of New Jersey

Back 12

Establishment Clause: First Ammendment, Can't tax for religious purposes

Front 13

Engel V Vitale

Back 13

case that determined that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools.

Front 14

Lemon v Kurtzman

Back 14

Lemon Test
The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion

Front 15

Wallace v Jaffree

Back 15

Ruled you cannot force a child to say a prayer or have a moment of silence

Front 16

City of Boerne v Flores

Back 16

aimed at preventing laws which substantially burden a person's free exercise of their religion. Struck this down saying it went beyond Congressional powers

Front 17

Miller v California

Back 17

Obscenity and Pornography

Front 18

Gideon v Wainwright

Back 18

provide counsel in criminal cases for defendants unable to afford their own attorneys or lawyers.

Front 19

Roe v Wade

Back 19

most laws against abortion in the United States violated a constitutional right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision overturned all state and federal laws outlawing or restricting abortion that were inconsistent with its holdings. Roe v. Wade is one of the most controversial and politically significant cases in U.S. Supreme Court history

Front 20

Webster v Reproductive Health Services

Back 20

a Missouri law that imposed restrictions on the use of state funds, facilities and employees in performing, assisting with, or counseling on abortions

Front 21

Texas v Johnson

Back 21

Justice William Brennan wrote for a five-justice majority in holding that the defendant's act of flag burning was protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution

Front 22

F.C.C. v Pacifica

Back 22

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the FCC action in 1978, by a vote of 5 to 4, ruling that the routine was "indecent but not obscene". The Court accepted as compelling the government's interests in 1) shielding children from patently offensive material, and 2) ensuring that unwanted speech does not enter one's hom