The Federal Courts & Civil Liberities Policymaking

Front 1

The power of courts to declare unconstituional the actions of the other branches and units of government.

Back 1

Judicial Review

Front 2

The doctrine of constitutional interpretation holding the document should be interpreted narrowly

Back 2

Strict construction

Front 3

The doctrine of constitutional interpretation holding the document should be interpreted broadly

Back 3

Loose Construction

Front 4

An interpretation of the Constitution that favors limiting the authority of the federal government while expanding the powers of the states.

Back 4

State's Rights

Front 5

A legislative package of reform measures porposed by President Franklin Roosevelt.

Back 5

New Deal

Front 6

Legal provisions requiring the social segration of African Americans in seperate and generally unequal facilites.

Back 6

Jim Crow Laws

Front 7

Are the personal rights and freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law, constitution, or judicial interpretation.
- They place limitation on the power of government to restrain or dictate how individuals act
- Civil liberties are found in the Bill of Rights
- The first ten amendments to the Constitution.
or
The protection of the individual from the unrestricted power of government.

Back 7

Civil Liberties

Front 8

The protection from the individual from arbitrary or discriminatory acts by government or by individuals based in that person's group status, such as race and gender

Back 8

Civil Rights

Front 9

the judicial doctrine stating that when the police violate an individual's constitutional rights, the evidence obtained as a result of police misconduct or error cannot be used against the defendant.
Weeks vs. United States

Back 9

Exclusionary Rule

Front 10

The legal concept that individuals cannot sue the government without the government's permission.

Back 10

Sovereign Immunity

Front 11

The provision found in the fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that declares that "No State shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".

Back 11

Equal Protection Clause

Front 12

The formal examination of a judicial dispute in accordance with law before a single judge.

Back 12

Trial

Front 13

The taking of a case from a lower court to a higher court by the losing party in a lower court decision.

Back 13

Appeal

Front 14

The authority of a court to hear and decide a case

Back 14

Jurisdiction

Front 15

A legal dispute concerning a private conflict between two parties; individuals,
corporations,or government agencies.

Back 15

Civil Case

Front 16

A legal dispute dealing with an alleged violation of a penal law.

Back 16

Criminal Case

Front 17

A court order requiring that government authorities either release a person held in custody or demonstrate that the person is detained in accordance with law.

Back 17

Writ of Habeas Corpus

Front 18

The custom that senators from the president's party have a veto on judicial appointments from their states.

Back 18

Senatorial Courtesy

Front 19

A written legal argument

Back 19

Legal Brief

Front 20

To uphold a lower court decision

Back 20

Affirm

Front 21

To return a case to the trial court for reconsideration in light of an appeals court decision.

Back 21

Remand

Front 22

The set of cases a court may hear as a trial court. First hearing or trial

Back 22

Original Jurisdiction

Front 23

Lawsuits inititated to assess the constitutionally of a legislative or executive act.

Back 23

Test Cases

Front 24

A process whereby an indignet litigent can appeal a case to the Supreme Court without paying the usual fees.

Back 24

In Forma Pauperis

Front 25

A closed meeting of the justices of the Unted States Supreme Court

Back 25

Conference

Front 26

A decision process used by the Supreme Court to determine which cases to consider on appeal, holding that the court will hear a case if four of the nine justices agree to review.

Back 26

Rule of Four

Front 27

The technical term for the Supreme Court's decision to hear argument's and make a ruling in a case.

Back 27

Certiorari

Front 28

An unsigned opinion of the Supreme Court

Back 28

Per Curiam Opinion

Front 29

Written legal arguments presented by parties not directly involved in the case, including interest groups and units of government.

Back 29

Amicus Curiae or Friend of the Court Briefs

Front 30

The official written statment of the Supreme Court that explains and justifies its ruling and serves as a guideline for lower courts when similar legal issues arise in the future

Back 30

Majority Opinion

Front 31

A judicial statement that agrees with the Court's ruling but disagrees with the reasoning of the majority opinion

Back 31

Concurring Opinion

Front 32

A judicial statement that disagrees with the decision of the courts majority

Back 32

Dissenting Opinion

Front 33

Law that is written by the legislature

Back 33

Statutory Law

Front 34

Law that involves the interpretation and application of the Constitution.

Back 34

Constitutional Law

Front 35

A federal law designed to end discrimination against persons with disablities and eliminate barriers to their full participation in American Society

Back 35

American with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Front 36

The power of an executive to veto sanctions or items if a tax or appropriation measure while signing the remainder of the bill into law

Back 36

Item Veto

Front 37

A constitutional document guaranteeing individual rights and liberties. In the United States national government, the Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the Constitiution.

Back 37

Bill of Rights

Front 38

The process through which the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteeth Amenedment to the U.S. Constitution to apply most of the provisions of the national Bill of Rights to the States.

Back 38

Selective Incorporation of the Bill of Rights

Front 39

A constitutional right that is so important that government cannot restrict it unless it can demonstrate a compelling or overriding public interest for so doing.

Back 39

Fundamental Right

Front 40

Administrative rules adopted by regulatory agencies.

Back 40

Administrative Laws

Front 41

An educational reform aimed at improving the quality of schools by allowing parents to select the school their children will attend

Back 41

Parental Choice

Front 42

A legislative measure that increases penalties for persons convicted of criminal offenses motivated by prejudice based on race, religion, national origin, gender or sexual orientation.

Back 42

Hate Crimes Law

Front 43

False written statements that lower a person's reputation or expose a person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule

Back 43

Libel

Front 44

Government action to prevent the publication of objectionable material

Back 44

Prior restraint

Front 45

The constitutional principle holding that government must follow fair and regular procedures in actions that could lead to an individual's suffering loss of life, liberty, or property

Back 45

Due Process of Law

Front 46

An official authorization issued by a judicial officer

Back 46

Warrant

Front 47

The judicial doctrine stating that when the police violate an individul's constitutional rights, the evidence obtained as a result of police misconduct or error cannot be used against the defendents.

Back 47

Exclusionary Rule

Front 48

The reasonable suspicion based on evidence that a particular search will uncover contraband

Back 48

Probable Cause

Front 49

A mistake by a trial court not serious to justify a new trial because the mistake could not have affected the outcome of the original trial

Back 49

Harmless Error

Front 50

A mistake by a trial court serious enough to justify a new trial because the mistake could have affected the outcome of the original trial.

Back 50

Reversible Error

Front 51

The government trying a criminal defendent a second time for the same offense after an acquittal in an earlier prosecution

Back 51

Double Jeopardy

Front 52

The death penalty

Back 52

Capital Punishment

Front 53

Prohibits the adoption of laws interferring with the free exercise of religion. The constitutional amendment that establishes the four great liberties; freedom of the press, speech, and of religion and of assembly.
- Engel vs. Vitale
- Employment division vs. Smith

Back 53

First Amendment

Front 54

The 1962 Supreme Court decision held that the daily recitation of prayer in public schools violates the First Amendment.

Back 54

Engel v. Vitale

Front 55

A first Amendment provision that prohibits government from interferring with the practice of religion. Religious practice is not protected absolutely. Court upheld state laws banning
- Snake handling
- Use of illegal drugs
- Polygamy
Cases:
* Wisconsin vs.Yoder
* Church of Lukumi Babbah Aye vs. City of Hialeah

Back 55

Free exercise clause

Front 56

Court sentences prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. Although the Supreme Court has ruled that mandatory death sentences for certain offenses are unconstitutional, it has not held that the death penalty itself constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
- Furman vs. Georgia
- Gregg vs. Goergia
- McClesky vs. Kemp
- McClesky vs. Zant
Atkins vs. Virginia

Back 56

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Front 57

The Constitutional Amendment adopted after the Civil War that states, "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the priveleges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
- Gitlow vs. New York

Back 57

Fourteeth Amendment

Front 58

Nonverbal communication, such as burning a flag or wearing an armband

Back 58

Symbolic Speech

Front 59

The 1971 Supreme Court decision that aid to church related schools must (1) have a secular legislative purpose (2)have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion (3) not foster excessive government entanglement with religion.
- Free Exercise Clause

Back 59

Lemon v. Kurtzman

Front 60

The 1973 Supreme Court desion held that states could not prohibit abortion in the first two trimesters of preganancy.

Back 60

Roe v. Wade

Front 61

The 1963 Supreme Court ruled that states must provide attorneys for indigent defendents charged with serious crimes

Back 61

Gideon v. Wainwright

Front 62

The 1973 Supreme Court reiterated that obscene expression is not protected by the First Amendment and attempted to refine its legal disegard for the truth.

Back 62

Miller v. California

Front 63

Obtaining evidence in a haphazard or random manner, a practice prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. Both probable cause and a search warrant are required for legal and proper search for a seizure of incriminating evidence

Back 63

Unreasonable searches and seizures

Front 64

The legal concept under which the Supreme Court has nationalized the Bill of Rights by making most of its provisions applicable to the states through the Fourteeth Amendment

Back 64

Incorporation Doctine

Front 65

Decided in 1964, the Supreme Court established that for a public official to recover damages to defamation, he or she must prove that the statements were made with "actual malice" or reckless disregard for the truth.

Back 65

New York Times v. Sullivan

Front 66

The 1961 Supreme Court decision extended the exclusionary rule to the states.

Back 66

Mapp v. Ohio

Front 67

The 1966 Supreme Court held that police must observe adequate procedural safeguards to ensure that any statment made by a person accused of a crime is obtained "voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently"

Back 67

Miranda v. Arizona

Front 68

The 1931 Supreme Court decision struck down a Minnesota law that permitted prior restraint against materials that were defamatory of obscene.

Back 68

Near v. Minnesota

Front 69

A landmark case decided in 1824 in which the Supreme Court overturned a New York law establishing a steamboat monopoly as an infringement of the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce.

Back 69

Gibbons v. Ogden

Front 70

The 1819 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Maryland tax on the national bank and gave broad scope to federal authority under the Constitution

Back 70

McCulloch v. Maryland

Front 71

The 1803 Case in which Chief Justice John Marshall first asserted the right of the Supreme Court to determine the meaning of the U.S. Constitution. The decsion established the Court's power of judicial review over acts of Congress, in this case the Judiciary Act of 1789.

Back 71

Marbury V. Madison

Front 72

The 1896 Supreme Court decision that upheld the segragationist laws known as Jim Crow laws.

Back 72

Plessy V. Ferguson

Front 73

The 1857 Supreme Court declared the Missiouri Compromise unconstitutional and held that the federal government had no power to prohibit slavery in the territories.

Back 73

Dred Scott v. Sandford

Front 74

The 1954 Supreme Court decision overturned Plessy v. Ferguson by striking down laws requiring school segration

Back 74

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka

Front 75

The U.S. Supreme Court assumed the authority to review the decisions of state's courts on quesions involving federal law.

Back 75

Martin V. Hunter's Lessee

Front 76

The U.S Supreme Court held that the Constitution protected private contracts from legislative infringement

Back 76

Dartmouth College v. Woodward

Front 77

Based on an interpretation of the Fourteeth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, The US Supreme Court halted a recount of ballots on Florida in the 2000 presidential election, thereby ensuring a Bush victory over Gore.

Back 77

Bush v. Gore

Front 78

The Supreme Court set a test for determining the constitutionality of state aid to parochial schools. Aid that serves a public purpose is constitutional; aid that serves a religios purpose is not.

Back 78

Everson v. Board of Ewing Township

Front 79

The Supreme Court abandoned the compelling state interest standard for general laws that have an incidental impact on religious practice.

Back 79

Employment Division v. Smith

Front 80

The Supreme Court devises "direct indictment test". Advocacy of illegal action can only be punished if there is a likelihood of immenant harm.

Back 80

Brandenburg v. Ohio

Front 81

The Supreme Court declared the death penalty as then applied, was unconstitutional because it allowed too much discretion

Back 81

Furman V. Georgia

Front 82

The 1976 Supreme Court decision ruled that the death penalty is not inherently unconstitutional.

Back 82

Gregg v. Georgia

Front 83

The Supreme Court struck down Texas sodomy law, which criminalized private, consensual conduct between two adults of the same gender

Back 83

Lawrence v. Texas

Front 84

False spoken language that tends to damage the reputation of another and that does not receive constitutional protection by the First Amendment is called?

Back 84

Slander

Front 85

Guarantees the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Back 85

Fourth Amendment

Front 86

Prevents self-incrimination. Prohibits double jeopardy, which involves the government trying a criminal defendant a second time for the same offense after an acquittal in the first trial. (Miranda vs. Arizona)

Back 86

Fifth Amendment

Front 87

Guarantees defendants a fair trial. The Right to counsel.
(Gideon vs. Wainwright)

Back 87

Sixth Amendment

Front 88

Prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
- Furman vs. Georgia
- Gregg vs. Georgia
- McClesky vs. Klemp
- McClesky vs. Zant
- Atkins vs. Virginia

Back 88

Eighth Amendment

Front 89

Refers to cases the Court can hear on appeal from a lower court. To hear an appeal of the trial court decision.

Back 89

Appellate Jurisdiction

Front 90

- Bob Jones University vs. United States
- Goldman vs. Weinberger (1986)
- Employment Division vs. Smith (1990)

Back 90

Freedom of Religion

Front 91

- Schenck vs. United States
The government can restrict political expression only if it has been a compelling interest that can’t be achieved by less restrictive means like expression deemed a threat to national security and public order which presents a “Clear and Present Danger Rule”
Congress allowed to restrict speech that would cause a “Clear and Present Danger” to Society
- Brandenburg vs. Ohio
Court devises “direct indictment test”
Advocacy of illegal action can only be punished if there is a likelihood of imminent harm

Back 91

Anti-government Speech

Front 92

The Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment does not protect obscenity. To be legally obscene, the material must depict or describe sexual conduct;
- Roth vs. Unites States (1957)
Obscene material is utterly redeeming social value. It must appeal to prurient interest when applying contemporary community standards.
- Miller vs. California
Obscene material contains potentially offensive sexual conduct and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value
(The LAPS test)

Back 92

Obscenity and Pornagraphy

Front 93

- Something is arrested
- Something is in plain view of the accused
- Something or someplace is in immediate control of the accused
Consent to search is given by roommates or other household members

Back 93

Police can search without warrant when...