Busy. Please wait.
or

show password
Forgot Password?

Don't have an account?  Sign up 
or

Username is available taken
show password

why


Make sure to remember your password. If you forget it there is no way for StudyStack to send you a reset link. You would need to create a new account.
We do not share your email address with others. It is only used to allow you to reset your password. For details read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.


Already a StudyStack user? Log In

Reset Password
Enter the associated with your account, and we'll email you a link to reset your password.
Don't know
Know
remaining cards
Save
0:01
To flip the current card, click it or press the Spacebar key.  To move the current card to one of the three colored boxes, click on the box.  You may also press the UP ARROW key to move the card to the "Know" box, the DOWN ARROW key to move the card to the "Don't know" box, or the RIGHT ARROW key to move the card to the Remaining box.  You may also click on the card displayed in any of the three boxes to bring that card back to the center.

Pass complete!

"Know" box contains:
Time elapsed:
Retries:
restart all cards
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.

  Normal Size     Small Size show me how

McNeil APGoPo Court

Landmark Court Cases

QuestionAnswer
Court case that established judicial review Marbury v. Madison
"the Court held that the law's dissimilar treatment of men and women was unconstitutional" Reed v. Reed
"Congress possessed unenumerated powers not explicitly outlined in the Constitution" McCulloch v. Maryland
The Court held the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional Dred Scott v. Sanford
the First Amendment was not intended to protect every utterance or form of expression Roth v. US (1957)
Government cannot censor or prohibit a publication in advance.Violates 1st LOL WUT amendment through the 14th. Near v. Minnesota(1919)
During wartime, utterances tolerable in peacetime can be punished. Not protected under 1st amendment. Schenck v. US(1931)
Regulation of interstate commerce was a power reserved for congress Gibbons V. Ogden
Court held that equal protection is to be extended to drinking age. Craig V. Boren
An individual's religious beliefs and practices can't excuse him from compliance with a valid law Employment Division v. Smith (1990)
People violate the first amendment if they teach or advocate the overthrow or destruction of the U.S. Government Dennis v. United States (1951)
Court case that established the Fourteenth Amendment AKA the bad amendment Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954)
Religious duty was not a suitable defense to a criminal indictment Reynolds v. United States (1878)
Segregation is okay as long as the facilities are equal (separate but equal doctrine) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
State cannot force the disclosure of a group's membership list NAACP v. Alabama (1958)
Clarified the 4th and 14th amedments by saying that illegally obtained evidence does not have to be excluded from trials. Wolf v. Colorado (1949)
A statistical study could not be used, in this case, to prove a violation of the 8th and 14th amendments. McClesky v. Kemp (1987)
Ruled that the wearing of armbands was "closely akin to 'purespeech'" and protected by the First Amendment. Tinker v. Des Moines ISD (1969)
Minimized white opposition to the goal of equality (by finding for Bakke) while extending gains for racial minorities through affirmative action. Regents of University of CA v. Bakke (1978)
The fact that buring of the flag even though was against the law, is a way of speech. So this is protected my the first admendement, freedom of speech. Texas V. Johnson
The court found that Georgias apportionment scheme discriminated against voters in the fifth congressional district, which violated the fourteenth admendement. Wesberry V. Sanders
The Commerce Clause allowed Congress to regulate local incidents of commerce, and that the Civil Right Act of 1964 passed constitutional muster. Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US (1964)
Educators have the right to censor school-sponsered speech. Educators didn't offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the content of student speech if their actions were "reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns." Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
The court concluded that, under the First Amendment right of expressive association, the Boy Scouts could bar homosexuals from serving as troop leaders. Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000)
The court held that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction over questions of state legislative apportionment. The Fourteenth Amendment equal protection issues raised in the case merited judicial evaluation. Baker v. Carr (1962)
The Court held that the Second Amendment protects an h individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. District of Columbia v. Heller (2007)
The Court held that a strip search of a middle schooler violated the Fourth Amendment where the school lacked reasons to suspect either that the drugs presented a danger or that they were concealed in her underwear. Safford Unified School District v. Redding(2009)
The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester. Roe v. Wade
The Court held that the establishment clause of the first amendment did not bar the monument on the grounds of Texas' state capitol building. The monument displayed the Ten Commandments. Van Orden v. Perry
The Court held that suspects must be warned of their rights before statements can be taken, such as right to remain silent and right to an attorney. Miranda v. Arizona
The divided Court found that there was no constitutional protection for acts of sodomy, and that states could outlaw those practices because they aren't part of American tradition or liberty. Bowers v. Hardwick
Congress could not show that the Child Online Protection Act's requirements were more effective than other methods of preventing minors from acessing "material that is harmful to minors."; allowing it may limit online publishing Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union
The Court allowed Welsh to be declared a conscientious objector even though he declared that his opposition to war was not based on religious convictions. The Court ruled that conscientious objection can be by non-religious beliefs and religious beliefs Welsh v. US (1969)
The Solomon Amendment regulated conduct, not speech, and was therefore constitutional. withholding federal funds from colleges that restrict military access to students does not violate the First Amendment. Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc.
The Court recognized the power of the government to confine unlawful combatants, but ruled that detainees who are U.S. citizens must have the ability to challenge their detention before an impartial judge. Hamdi v Rumsfeld (2003)
Court case that said the fifth amendment was not applicable to the states. Barron v. Baltimore (1833)
Decided that the presumption of disadvantage based on race alone, and consequent allocation of favored treatment, is a discriminatory practice that violates the equal protection principle embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment Adarand v. Pena (1995)
court ruled that it was illegal for Nixon to prevent the publication of "classified information" because printing the information caused no harm to Americans New York Times v. US (1971)
court ruled that it was legal to restrict the amount of money individuals could contribute to a campaign AND that it was illegal to restrict how much a candidate could contribute to his/her own campaign Buckley v. Valeo (1976)
The Court Ruled that local school authorities and courts were to implement the priniciples of the Brown I decision (desegregate schools). Brown v Topeka II (1955)
The courts decided that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional Bush v Gore (2000)
The Court held that the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements, even false ones, about the conduct of public officials except when statements are made with actual malice. New York Times v. Sullivan (1963)
court ruled states have the power to restrict speech or publication if they will result in violence Giltow v New York (1925)
court ruled that in extreme criminal cases, punishment of death is not cruel and unusual punishment Gregg v Georgia (1976)
The need to protect against espionage outweighed human rights. Korematsu v. US (1944)
the court held that Gideon had a right to be represented by a court-appointed attorney as protected by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments Gideon v. Wainwright(1962)
the court ruled that racial gerrymandering of the congressional redistricting process violated the Equal Protection Clause Miller v. Johnson (1994)
The court ruled that under the First Amendment religious practices outweighed the state's interest in making children attend school past eighth grade Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
The court allowed for the regulation of abortion and checked the validity of the laws restriction abortion Planned Parenthood v. Casey
Homosexuals are legal to conduct private intimacy under the Due Process Clause Lawerence & Garner v. Texas (2002)
The flag is an important symbol that promotes the minds of children in common schools of national unity Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940)
The Court brushed aside the First Amendment issue and declared that "all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is, by [the Fourth Amendment], inadmissible in a state court." Mapp v. Ohio
Court held that Miranda governs the admissibility of statements made during custodial interrogation in both state and federal courts Dickerson v. US
The Bill of Rights grants a constitutional right for privacy in marital relations. Griswold v. Connecticut
The First Amendment does not forbid the banning of child pornography New York v. Ferber
The government must demonstrate a compelling government interest before denying unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because their job conflicted with their religion. Sherbert v. Verner
That redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause. Reno v. Shaw
redefined the Constitutional test for determining what constitutes obscene material unprotected by the First Amendment Roth v. US
Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment and that Miller test would determine what constitutes obscene material. Miller v. California
Free exercise of religion the church was allowed to sacrifice animals and the hialeah florida city council could not stop them Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah
People are allowed to first amendment activities. Caused LAX to become a "First Amendment Free Zone," Airport Commissioners v. Jews for Jesus
The Court held that the District's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violates the Establishment Clause. The Court concluded the football game prayers were public speech authorized by a gov't policy and taking place Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe (1999)
Regulations dealt mostly with soft-money contributions used to register voters and increase attendance at the polls, not with campaign expenditures (which are more explicitly a statement of political values and therefore deserve more protection), the Cour McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003)
The Supreme Court held that the Texas Legislature's redistricting plan did not violate the Constitution, but that part of the plan violated the Voting Rights Act League of Latin American Citizens v. Perry
T.A girl was accused of smoking in the girls' bathroom of her high school. A principal at the school searched her purse. The Court abandoned "probable cause" for searches in schools New Jersey v. T.L.O.
Established a three-part test for laws dealing with religious establishment. A statute must have a secular legislative purpose, must not foster or inhibit religion, and does not foster government involvement with religion. Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)
The Court held that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified, presidential privilege. US v. Nixon
Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion? The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy (recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester and d
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 m No and yes. There was no single majority opinion. Four of the justices contended that any racial quota system supported by government violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr., agreed, casting the deciding vote ordering the medic
Did the statistical study prove that McCleskey's sentence violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments? The Court held that since McCleskey could not prove that purposeful discrimination which had a discriminatory effect on him existed in this particular trial, there was no constitutional violation. Justice Powell refused to apply the statistical study in t
Did the Nixon administration's efforts to prevent the publication of what it termed "classified information" violate the First Amendment? Yes. In its per curiam opinion the Court held that the government did not overcome the "heavy presumption against" prior restraint of the press in this case. Justices Black and Douglas argued that the vague word "security" should not be used "to abrogate
The Court found that New York's licensing requirement for out-of-state operators was inconsistent with a congressional act regulating the coasting trade. The New York law was invalid by virtue of the Supremacy Clause. In his opinion, Chief Justice Marshal The Court found that New York's licensing requirement for out-of-state operators was inconsistent with a congressional act regulating the coasting trade. The New York law was invalid by virtue of the Supremacy Clause. In his opinion, Chief Justice Marshal
Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction over questions of legislative apportionment? In an opinion which explored the nature of "political questions" and the appropriateness of Court action in them, the Court held that there were no such questions to be answered in this case and that legislative apportionment was a justiciable issue. In h
Created by: mlhollin