• 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

Card Range To Study



Play button


Play button




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;

18 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Chadha v. INS
(1983) Supreme Court rules the one-house veto of executive procedure is unconstitutional (legislative Veto)
Clinton v. NYC
(1998) Court rules that bills that pass through the House and Senate must be completely accepted or rejected, effectively ruling the "line-item veto" unconstitutional
Texas v. Johnson
(1989) Court rules that a Texas man who burned a flag was under his first ammendment rights of freedom of speech.
Korematsu v. United States
(1944)A Japanese American citizen refused to follow the presedential and conressional orders of interment. The Courts ruled that the temporary limitation of his rights was neccessary for national security.
Brown v. Board of Ed of Topeka
(1954) Seperate but equal facilities are inherently unequal.
Regents of U of Cal v. Bakke
(1978) Did the University of California violate the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by practicing an affirmative action policy that resulted in the repeated rejection of Bakke's application for admission to its medical school? Yes, Bakke got admitted, and no, affirmitive action policies are legal.
Nixon v. United States
(1993) Nixon, a federal court judge, was impeached but he argued the Senate rule violated the impeachement trial clause. Was ruled unjusticiable by the courts.
Gitlow v. New York
(1925) Gitlow was arressted for passsing out booklets agianst the government, although no action was taken. Reulted in the "dangerous tendency" test.
Barron v. Baltimore
(1833) Barron suses the city of Baltimore for lost profits. Court rules the Fifth Amendment does not apply to the states, only the national gov't.
Fletcher v. Peck
(1810) the Court held that laws annulling contracts or grants made by previous legislative acts were constitutionally impermissible
Miranda v. Arizona
(1966) Establishes Miranda Rights. Requires police to make suspects aware of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during questioning.
Gideon v. Wainwright
(1963) Required states to provide public defenders for indigent defendents in felony cases.(sixth ammendment and due proccess clause of 14th amendment)
Buckley v. Valeo
(1976) First, it held that restrictions on individual contributions to political campaigns and candidates did not violate the First Amendment since the limitations of the FECA enhance the "integrity of our system of representative democracy" by guarding against unscrupulous practices. Second, the Court found that governmental restriction of independent expenditures in campaigns, the limitation on expenditures by candidates from their own personal or family resources, and the limitation on total campaign expenditures did violate the First Amendment. Since these practices do not necessarily enhance the potential for corruption that individual contributions to candidates do, the Court found that restricting them did not serve a government interest great enough to warrant a curtailment on free speech and association.
Clinton v. Jones
(1997) In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that the Constitution does not grant a sitting President immunity from civil litigation except under highly unusual circumstances. After noting the great respect and dignity owed to the Executive office, the Court held that neither separation of powers nor the need for confidentiality of high-level information can justify an unqualified Presidential immunity from judicial process.
U.S. Terms Limits v. Thornton
(1995) A state congressional term limits amendment is unconstitutional if it has the likely effect of handicapping a class of candidates and "has the sole purpose of creating additional qualifications indirectly
Gibbons v. Ogden
(1824) Interpreted Congress's rights to regulate interstate commerce to include all forms of business, not just the exchange of goods
Baker v. Carr
(1962) Granted federal courts jurisdiction over state apportionment systems to assure that all citizen's votes are granted equal
Mapp v. Ohio
(1961) Extended the federal exclusionary rule to the states; prohibits illegally obtained evidence from being presented in courts.