• 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

1/13

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;

13 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Baker v Carr
Started the process
Court said federal courts did have jurisdiction to decide conflicts over the drawing of district lines by state legislature. The link was it affected the election of the President and representatives in Congress
Reynolds v Simms
Court used the “equal protection” clause in the 14th Amendment. Required all seats in both houses in the Alabama legislature be apportioned based on population. Basically they had to redraw their district lines
Westberry v Sanders
Court ruled that the Constitution clearly intended that a vote in one congressional district was to be worth as much as a vote in another congressional district. One person- one vote rule
Gitlawn v New York
1st key case in the nationalization of the Bill of Rights. Court ruled freedom of speech couldn’t be limited by state and local governments. The exceptions are 2nd Amendment, 3rd Amendment, 10th Amendment, Excessive bails and finds of the 8th Amendment, Prohibition, 2 judicial procedures (5th Amendment & 7th Amendment) Grand jury not needed to prosecute you on a state level. Also not required to have a jury in civil cases over $20
Weeks v U.S.
Supreme Court established the exclusionary rule which said any illegally obtained evidence can’t be used in a federal case. Didn’t apply to the state level
Mapp v Ohio
Expanded the Weeks v. U.S. decision to the state level. Also found in the 4th Amendment
Gideon v Wainwraight
Defendant asked the state of Florida to appoint him a lawyer and they refused. While in prison, he wrote the Supreme Court and they agreed that he did have the right to an attorney. Goes back to the 6th Amendment
Escobedo v Illinois
Defendant confessed to killing his brother in law after being questioned all night. While in the session, the police never informed the man he right the remain silent nor the right to an attorney. As a result. the Supreme Court reversed the decision.
Miranda v Arizona
Court created the Miranda Rules
Engel v Vitale
A school prayer case in New York. The New York Board of Rejents created a non-devetional that was to be used daily at the school. The Court ruled it unconstitutional because a governement facility wrote it.
Abington School District v Schempp
Court banned bible readings and the reading of the Lord's Prayer in school because a teacher conducted the readings.
Tinker v Desmoies
Protects expressive speech. Two kids were wearing black armbands as protest against Vietnam. School administration kicked them out and the family sued. Court ruled they could wear the bands because it wasn’t causing problems
Texas v Johnson
Court ruled the burning of the American flag is not protected under expressive speech. 1st Amendment doesn't protect "fighting word" speech, slander, nor libel.