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;
34 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
McCulloch v. Maryland 1819 Petitioner: James W. McCulloch Respondent: Maryland Background: BUS est. 1816; Maryland attempts to tax the bank; McCulloch refused to pay P. Argument: Creation of BUS was implied power & the tax by Maryland was unconstitutional R. Argument: Charter for fed. bank was not enumerated and therefor unconstitutional |
Decision: Congress possessed enumerated powers, not specifically stated in the constitution. States cannot tax instruments of the national government "The constitution and the laws made in pursuance of are supreme. They control the constitution and laws of the respective states, and cannot be controlled by them." |
|
|
Gibbons v. Ogden 1824 P: Thomas Gibbons R: Aaron Ogden Background: NY granted right to operate steamboats on state waters, but required out-of-state boats to pay a fee. P Argument: Congress had exclusive power over interstate commerce; NY was interfering w/ federal law R Arguments: States should have fully concurrent power w/ Congress on interstate commerce |
Decision: NY licensing requirement was inconcurrent w/ congressional act regulating trade. "If... the sovereignty of Congress is plenary to those objects, the power over commerce with foreign nations and among the several states is vested in Congress as absolutely as it would be in single government." |
|
|
U.S. v. Lopez 1995 P: USA R: Alfonzo Lopez Background: Lopez brought weapon to school, charged w/ firearm possession on school grounds. R. Argument: Gun-free school zones were unconstitutional P. Argument: Possession of weapon would lead to a violent crime, which would effect general econ. condition |
Decision: Possession of firearm is not economic activity that might affect interstate commerce, so federal regulation is unconstitutional. "Well, let's do exactly that and as whether the simple possession of something at or near a school is commerce at all." |
|
|
Marbury v. Madison 1803 P: William Marbury R: James Madison Background: Marbury was appointed as Justice of the Peace, but the appointment was never finalized P. Argument: Entitled to financial compensation R. Argument: Undelivered or late commissions are void. |
Decision: Consternation is fundamental law of the land and any act thus conflicting with it is void; established judicial review. "An act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void." |
|
|
Schenck v. USA 1919 P: Schenck R: USA Background: Durin WW1, Schenck protested the draft and was charged w/ conspiracy. P. Argument: Conviction violated the 1st amendment R. Argument: Such speech is intolerable during wartime |
Decision: Schenck is not protected in the situation "The question in every case is whether the words are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about substantial evils that Congress has a right to prevent." |
|
|
Gitlow v. NY 1925 P: Gitlow R: NY Background: Gitlow, a socialist, was arrested for distributing the "leftwing manifesto" P Argument: Nothing resulted from publication R Argument: Avocation of doctrine violated the law |
Decision: 1st amendment applies to states but they can prohibit it to causes that danger public security. "Dangerous tendency" |
|
|
Tinker v. Des Moines 1969 P: John and Mary Tinker R: Des Moines School District Background: Students in Des Moines planned public rally in support of Vietnam truce, school district shut down plan P Argument: District violated the right of expression R Argument: The district's actions were reasonable to uphold school discipline |
Decision: Armband represented free speech, and students don't lose their 1st amendment rights when on school grounds. "Materially and substantially interfere" |
|
|
Brandenburg v. Ohio 1969 P: Ohio R: Brandenburg Background: KKK Leader Brandenburg convicted under Ohio criminal syndicalism law after a rally P Argument: Brandenburg was advocating criminal activity and/or terrorism R Argument: State violated 1st and 14th amendments |
Decision: Ohio law violated Brandenburg's right to free speech "Crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform" |
|
|
Buckley v. Valeo 1976 P: Buckley R: Valeo Background: Congress attempted to find political corruption by restricting financial contributions to a candidate P Argument: Limits on spending violates 1st amendment R Argument: Did not violate 1st amendment |
Decision: Several provisions were unconstitutional
"The integrity of our system is a representative democracy." |
|
|
Texas v. Johnson 1989
P: TX R: Johnson Background: Greg Lee Johnson burned the American flag outside the Dallas city hall to protest Reagan policies P Argument: Desecrating the flag is illegal R Argument: The flag burning is a form of expression and is protected by the 1st amendment |
Decision: Johnson's actions were protected under the 1st amendment
"If there is a bedrock principle underlying the 1st amendment, it is that the govt may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply b/c society finds it offensive or disagreeable." |
|
|
Citizens United v. FEC 2010 P: Citizens United R: FEC P Argument: Violated 1st amendment R Argument: Bipartisan reformat |
Decision: Conviction overturned, protected under the 1st amendment |
|
|
Near v. Minnesota 1931 P: Near R: Minnesota Background: Near charged local officers with being implicated with gangsters P Argument: "Gag law" violates free press R Argument: State law allows such action against periodcals |
Decision: Statue authorizing was unconstitutional "Malicious, scandalous, and defamatory" |
|
|
NY Times v. USA 1971 P: NY Times R: USA Background: Nixon administration tried to stop NY Times and Washington Post from publishing classified material. P Argument: Publishing protected under 1st R Argument: Restraint necessary for national security |
Decision: Govt did not overcome prior restraint of the press "To overcome federal law was embodied in the 1st amendment." |
|
|
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier 1988 P: Hazelwood School District R: Kuhlmeier Background: Principal reviewed student newspaper and ordered that inappropriate pages be removed. P Argument: Had right to keep school paper appropriate for school R Argument: Removal of pages violated 1st |
Decision: 1st did not require schools to promote particular types of student speech. "Inconsistent with the shared values of a civilized social order" |
|
|
W. Virginia v. Barnette 1943 P: W. Virginia Board of Education R: Barnette Background: BoE required a salute be mandatory P Argument: Refusal was insubordination R Argument: Compulsory salute violated 1st |
Decision: Compelling a student to salute was unconstitutional "Compulsory unification of opinion" |
|
|
Engel v. Vitale 1962 P: Engel R: Vitale Background: Board of regents authorized voluntary prayer for start of the school day P Argument: Prayer violates est of religion clause in 1st R Argument: Nondenominational and voluntary prayer |
Decision: By providing prayers, NY approved religion, which is unconstitutional "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and beg Thy blessings upon us, our teachers, and our country." |
|
|
Lemon v. Kurtzman 1971 P: Lemon R: Kurtzman Background: Penn. and RI provided financial aid to church related education institutions P Argument: Penn. act allowed R Argument: Violated 1st |
Decision: Providing aid singularly to church related education violates the "establishing religion" clause of the 1st "Church related educational institutions" |
|
|
Wisconsin v. Yoder 1971 P: Wisconsin R: Yoder Background: Amish citizens persecuted for refusing to send children to high school. P Argument: All children must attend school until 16 R Argument: Attending high school was contrary to religious beliefs |
Decision: Free exercise of religion under the 1st amendment outweighed the state's compulsory school attendance "In sharp conflict with the fundamental mode of life mandated by Amish religion." |
|
|
Oregon v. Smith 1990 P: Employment Division (Dept. of HR of Oregon) R: Alfred Smith et al. Background: Two Native Americans fired for consuming illegal drugs as part of religious ceremonies P Argument: Oregon drug law prohibited illegal drugs for sacramental religious reasons R Argument: Law violated free exercise clause |
Decision: Religious beliefs do not excuse from compliance with valid law. "Would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind." |
|
|
Roth v. USA 1957 P: Roth R: USA Background: Roth convicted of mailing obscene circulars and an obscene book. P Argument: Obscenity restrictions infringe on the 1st amendment R Argument: Violation of federal obscenity statue |
Decision: Obscenity was not protected "Within the area of constitutionally protected speech or press." |
|
|
Miller v. Cali 1973 P: Marvin Miller R: California Background: Miller mass advertised "adult" material P Argument: Sale & distribution of obscene material is protected by 1st R Argument: CA statue prohibits distribution of obscene material |
Decision: Obscene materials were not defended by the 1st amendment "Alternately without redeeming social value" |
|
|
Mapp v. Ohio 1961 P: Dollree Mapp R: Ohio Background: illegal police search and seizure yielded obscene material P Argument: Freedom of expression R Argument: No freedom of expression |
Decision: Brushed away all evidence due to 4th amendment "All evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the constitution is inadmissible in absolute court." |
|
|
NJ v. TLO 1985 P: NJ R: TLO Background: High school student found with drugs and defied exclusionary rule P Argument: Exclusionary rule doesn't apply to search/seizure by public school officials R Argument: Exclusionary rule does apply` |
Decision: No decision "Mr. Nodes, under NJ law, can a minor consent to a search." |
|
|
Gideon v. Wainwright 1963 P: Gideon R: Wainwright Background: Gideon charged w/ felony & lawyer of court asked to be appointed to him refused P Argument: Trial court's decision violated constitutional right to be represented by council R Argument: 6th amendment does not extend to felonies in state courts |
Decision: Accused needs means for proper defense (6th extends to state court felonies) "Special circumstance" |
|
|
Miranda v. Arizona 1960 P: Miranda R: Arizona Background: Multiple convicts interrogated w/out being read their rights P Argument: interrogating w/out right is violating the 5th R Argument: wasn't given any rights |
Decision: Statements could not be used unless demonstrated use of procedural safeguards. "Effective to secure the privilege against self inclination." |
|
|
Gregg v. Georgia 1976 P: Gregg R: Georgia Background: Gregg sentenced to death P Argument: Sentence was cruel and unusual; violated 8th and 14th R Argument: Affirmed sentence except to imposition for robbery |
Decision: Did not violate amendments under any circumstances "cruel and unusual" |
|
|
Griswold v. Connecticut 1965 P: Griswold R: Connecticut Background: gave illegal council concerning birth control P Argument: Constitution protected right to be counseled in use of contraceptives R Argument: It doesn't |
Decision: Though not specifically stated, BoR creates a right of privacy "Well, with that argument, it involves only married women." |
|
|
Roe v. Wade 1973 P: Jane Roe R: Henry Wade Background: Roe wanted abortion but TX prohibited it P Argument: Const. embraces the right to terminate pregnancy by abortion R Argument: It doesn't |
Decision: Fell within the right of privacy, total autonomy during first trimester "And it was not only at the time she sought the abortion that her desire was to terminate the pregnancy." |
|
|
Dred Scott v. Sanford 1857 P: Dred Scott R: Sanford Background: Scott was a slave, after living in Louisiana, sued for freedom. P Argument: Residence in free territory made him a free man R Argument: No pure-blood Negro descendant of a slave could be a citizen under article 4 of constitution |
Decision: Scott was a slave, under articles 3 and 4, only a US citizen could be a state citizen "The judicial power shall extend to controversies... between citizens of different states." |
|
|
Plessy v. Ferguson 1896 P: Plessy R: Ferguson Background: Louisiana required segregated railway cars P Argument: Laws required segregation was unconstitutional due to equal protection in the 14th R Argument: Not unconstitutional |
Decision: "Separate but equal" applies as long as facilities are equal "Separate but equal" |
|
|
Brown v. Board of Education 1954 P: Brown R: Board of Edu. of Topeka Background: Black children could not attend public schools attended by white children P Argument: Segregation deprives minorities R Argument: Segregation is acceptable |
Decision: Segregation is detrimental to minorities "Objective factors" |
|
|
Wesberry v. Sanders 1964 P: Wesberry R: Sanders Background: Wesberry protests appointment scheme P Argument: Claims system dilutes right to vote compared to other govt residents R Arguments: it is equal |
Decision: N/a |
|
|
Baker v. Carr 1962 P: Baker R: Carr Background: 1901 law ignored P Argument: TN's reappointment efforts ignored significant econ. growth and pop. shifts R. Argument: Supreme court does not have jurisdiction over legislature appointments |
Decision: Legislature appointment was a justifiable issue "Political questions" |
|
|
Regents of Cali v. Bakke 1970 P: Regents of Univ of CA R: Bakke Background: Bakke excluded from Univ due to affirmative action P Argument: Affirmative action does not violate acts b/c it is an effort to redress minority exclusions R Arguments: Qualifications exceeded minority, was excluded solely on race |
Decision: No single majority opinion. Any racial quota system violated civil rights act. Others argue that use of race as a criteria was permissible. "Qualified minorities" |
