Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • 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

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/14

Click to flip

14 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Pierce v. Society of Sisters
(1923) recognized parents’ right to determine children’s education
Skinner v. Oklahoma
(1942) court voided sterilization law; Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the existence and survival of the race
Griswold v Connecticut
(1965) recognized a married couple’s right to receive information about contraception from their doctor

Johns - Griswold is the landmark modern, post WW2 case which established what seems to be obvious – married people can talk to their doctors about contraception. The reasoning in Griswold – although the BoR protects certain things like quartering soldiers and probable cause – ct said expressions of underlying notion of privacy. “radiates from penumbras of specific BoR amendments. From Griswold flowed Roe v Wade
Eisenstadt
extended contraception use to unmarried people
Carey
Extended it to minors under 16
Roe v Wade
(1973) Abortion Fundamental right until compelling state interest; 2nd trimester interest in health of the mother; 3rd-interest in the life of the fetus
Planned Parenthood v Casey
Plurality
upheld a woman’s right to terminate pregnancy, but rejected trimester approach and afforded States greater regulatory authority under an undue burden analysis
got rid of spousal notification
Stenberg v Carhart (2007)
held that the prohibition of a specific abortion procedure was not an undue burden subject to a facial challenge; reserved the possibility that it might be subject to an as-applied challenge
Bowers v Hardwick
(1986) Upheld a law prohibiting sodomy but wrote it as an opinion against same sex sodomy

"respondent would have us announce a fundamental right to engage in homosexual sodomy. this we are quite unwilling to do"
Lawrence v Texas
(2003)
Overruled Bowers said right to privacy; can’t justify it on moral grounds—still unclear whether this is a fundamental rights case or just that state had no rational basis
Cruzan v Director of MO Dept. of Health
(1990)
Court said it was alright for MO to say have to prove person’s right by clear and convincing standard; also establishes fundamental right of competent person to refuse unwanted medical treatment
Washington v Glucksberg
(1997)
No right to commit suicide and gave 2 tests to determine fundamental rights: objectively deeply rooted in this nation’s history and tradition; implicit in concept of ordered liberty
Loving v Virginia
Marriage - antidiscrimination statute
Moore v East Cleveland
Family residence throw the orphan out because stayed with Grandma (zoning regs)