• 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

1/9

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;

9 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

What did the SC rule in the case Brown v. Board of Education Topeka (1954)?

Laws establishing separate education facilities for black and white students were unconstitutional.

Which SC case did the ruling in Brown v. Board of Education Topeka (1954) overthrow?

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - allowed state sponsored segregation

What did the SC rule in the case Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (1971)?

Busing programs that aimed to increase intergration was constitutional

What did the SC rule in the case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)?

That the use of quotas was unconsitutional, but affirmative action in the admissions process was constitutional

What did the SC rule in the case Adarand Contractors v. Pena (1995)?

All affirmative action plans must pass strict scrutiny before being approved

What did the SC rule in the case Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)?

It was unconsitutional to give minority candidates additional points because it was too similar to quotas

What did the SC rule in the case Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)?

The policy of considering race passed the strict scrutiny standards

What did the SC rule in the case Parents Involved in Community Schools Inc v. Seattle Schools District (2007)?

It was unconstitutional to use race as a tie breaker in schools admissions processes

What did the SC rule in the case Meredith v. Jefferson County (Kentucky) Board of Education (2007)?

The County's enrollment plan was unconstitutional under the 14th amendment - Equal protection clause