Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Case Law Test > Case Law > Flashcards

Case Law Flashcards

1
Q

Baker v Carr*

A

1962
Background: Tennessee reapportionment ignored population changes
Precedent: “one person one vote”
Ruling: both houses of congress must be apportioned by population
Reasoning: 14th’s = protection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Barron v Baltimore

A

1833
Background: construction for city diverted water from harbor, hurt Barron’s profits
Ruling: can’t apply 5th amendment to states
Precedent: BoR didn’t restrict state governments
Reasoning: first 10 amendments did not mention restrictions on state governments

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Bostock v Clayton County

A

2020
Background: Clayton County fired Bostock for being gay
Ruling: firing employee for being lgbt violates Title VII of Civil Rights Act 1964
Precedent: can’t discriminate based on gender or sexuality
Reasoning: Protected by Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Brandenburg v Ohio

A

1969
Background: kkk leader arrested for advocating violent political reform
Ruling: Ohio law violated Brandenburg’s freedom of speech
Precedent: speech can be prohibited if: inciting lawless action and if it is likely to produce such action, Brandenburg Test
Reasoning: 1st amendment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Brown v Board*

A

1954
Background: blacks denied admittance to public schools bc of race
Ruling: separate but equal violates = protection of 14th amendment
Precedent: segregation unlawful, overturned plessy v ferguson
Reasoning: violates = protection clause of 14th amendment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Buckley v Valeo

A

1976
Background: after watergate, Congress tried to limit amount someone could donate to a political candidate
Ruling: restrictions didn’t violate 1st amendment, limiting campaign expenditures violated 1st amendment
Precedent: gov limits on individual expenditures supporting political candidates unconstitutional
Reasoning: 1st amendment (freedom of speech)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Bush v Gore

A

2000
Background: florida law required recount (by hand) of all votes due to close margin, bush asked for stay on decision
Ruling: florida’s recounting scheme was unconstitutional bc methods varied throughout the state
Precedent: limited ruling to the specific case
Reasoning: 14th’s = protection clause, can’t devalue ballot

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Citizens United v FEC*

A

2010
Background: FEC limited when ads mentioning candidates could be broadcast
Ruling: can’t limit corporate funding political broadcast during elections
Precedent: can’t restrict corporate funding for political candidates
Reasoning: 1st amendment freedom of speech

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

City of Greece v Galloway

A

2014
Background: town of greece held prayer before town meetings, dominated by Christian clergy
Ruling: can hold prayer, doesn’t violate establishment clause, prayer doesn’t need to be non-sectarian
Precedent: can open gov meetings with prayer
Reasoning: doesn’t violate 1st amendment establishment clause bc doesn’t coerce public

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Colegrove v Green

A

1946
Background: Illinois hadn’t redistricted since 1901, population disparities between districts
Ruling: districts were constitutional because existing laws didn’t restrict population and compactness of districts
Precedent: political question, congress and states responsable for redistricting
Reasoning: nonjusticiable question

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

DC v Heller

A

2008
Background:DC prohibited carrying unregistered firearm, must keep guns inoperable when not being used
Ruling: violated 2nd amendment
Precedent: individual right to bear arms not connected to militia clause
Reasoning: 2nd amendment, focus on 2nd clause (right to bear arms)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Dobbs v Jackson

A

2022
Background: Mississippi law banned abortions after 15 weeks
Ruling: Constitution doesn’t give right to abortion, roe & casey overturned
Precedent: no constitutional right to abortion, is a state decision
Reasoning: abortion not listed in Constitution

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Dred Scott v Sanford

A

1957
Background: Dred Scott moved to free state with his master, sued for his freedom
Ruling: Dred Scott didn’t have standing, wasn’t a citizen
Precedent: Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, blacks can’t be citizens
Reasoning: 5th amendment’s due process clause means gov can’t free slaves

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Engel v Vitale

A

1962
Background: NY allowed optional prayer at the start of school
Ruling: states can’t hold prayer in public school
Precedent: violates establishment clause even if there is no coercion
Reasoning: 1st amendment’s establishment clause

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Furman v Georgia

A

1972
Background: Furman caught burglarizing home, tripped setting off gun, killing resident, sentenced to death
Ruling: death penalty cruel and unusual punishment in this case
Precedent: death penalty can’t be applied arbitrarily and inconsistently
Reasoning: 8th amendment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Gideon v Wainwright

A

1963
Background: Gideon charged with breaking and entering, couldn’t afford lawyer
Ruling: 6th amendment right to lawyer/counsel applies to state courts
Precedent: all defendants have a right to a lawyer
Reasoning:6th amendment and 14th amendment’s due process (right to counsel)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Gitlow v New York

A

1925
Background: Gitlow arrested for writing advocating violent action against the government
Ruling: New York law could limit Gitlow’s actions but incorporation principle allows BoR to be applied to the states
Precedent: started the process of of selective incorporation
Reasoning: 14th amendment prohibits states restricting free speech but Gitlow can still be prosecuted because he advocated for overthrowing the government

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Gomillion v Lightfoot

A

1960
Background: Alabama re-drew Tuskegee’s electoral boundaries to dilute the area’s black population
Ruling: can’t deny equal representation to african americans
Precedent: can’t deny blacks equal protection
Reasoning: 15th amendment (can’t deny right to vote)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Gregg v Georgia

A

1976
Background: Gregg was guilty of armed robbery and sentenced to death
Ruling: The death penalty doesn’t violate the 8th and 14th amendments if it takes punishments for similar crimes and the severity of the crime are taken into account
Precedent: death penalty is constitutional
Reasoning: the punishment is accepted by most states and is only used for extreme crimes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Griswold v Connecticut

A

1965
Background: Connecticut banned contraceptives, planned parenthood arrested for opening a clinic
Ruling: violates the right to privacy implied in several amendments (1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th)
Precedent: established right to privacy in a marriage
Reasoning: BoR prevents government intrusion into married relationship

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Heart of Atlanta Motel v US

A

1964
Background: an Atlanta Motel refused to accept blacks
Ruling: can’t discriminate, violates Civil Rights Act
Precedent: private businesses can be forced to follow Civil Rights Act
Reasoning: Commerce clause and Civil Rights Act 1964 because motel impacted interstate commerce

22
Q

Kennedy v Bremerton School District

A

2022
Background: football coach prayed with students during games
Ruling: coach could pray
Precedent: largely overturned Lemon test
Reasoning: free exercise clause and 1st amendment

23
Q

Korematsu v US

A

1944
Background: Korematsu arrested for no following concentration camp order.
Ruling: The relocation order was constitutional
Precedent: detention was a military, not racial descision
Reasoning: It did not violate the 5th amendment or show racial prejudice.

24
Q

Lawrence v US

A

2003
Background: Responding to a weapons report, Lawrence was found having consensual gay acts
Ruling: Texas law violated due process clause
Precedent: overturned part of DOMA
Reasoning: due process clause and privacy

25
Lemon v Kurtzman
1971 Background: PA and RI payed for parts of religious private edu Ruling: statutes violated the establishment clause Precedent: Lemon Test (law must have secular purpose, can't advance or inhibit religion, and not entangle gov and religion) Reasoning: Lemon Test and establishment clause
26
Mahanoy Area School District v BL
2021 Background: cheerleader suspended from the cheer team for making an inappropriate post outside of school Ruling: BL's suspension violated her 1st amendment rights Precedent: off campus speech is largely the responsibility of parents Reasoning: 1st amendment
27
Mapp v Ohio
1961 Background: obscene materials found in Mapp's house after illegal police search Ruling: warrantless search/seizure violates 4th amendment Precedent: can't use illegally obtained evidence in court Reasoning: illegally obtained evidence violates 4th amendment , applies to states through 14th amendment
28
Marbury v Madison*
1803 Background: Jefferson ordered Madison to withhold Adam's undelivered commissions Ruling: refusal to deliver commissions was illegal, part of the Judiciary Act was unconstitutional and congress can't pass unconstitutional laws Precedent: established judicial review (declaring a law unconstitutional) Reasoning: Article III (est judicial branch)
29
McCulloch v Maryland
1819 Background: 2nd US bank established in Maryland which taxed the bank, the bank refused to pay the taxes Ruling: the US could establish the bank and states can't tax the federal government Precedent: federal laws superior to state laws Reasoning: necessary and proper clause
30
McDonald v Chicago*
2010 Background: citizens challenged Chicago handgun ban Ruling: 2nd amendment applicable to the states and local gov Precedent: incorporated 2nd amendment Reasoning: due process clause and 2nd amendment
31
Miranda v Arizona
1966 Background: Miranda not informed of 5th amendment rights Ruling: 5th amendment requires suspects to be informed of their rights (to silence and a lawyer) Precedent: right against self-incrimination Reasoning: 5th and 6th amendment
32
Morse v Frederick
2007 Background: student suspended for sign promoting drug use Ruling: schools can keep students from displaying pro-drug messages Precedent: students in school speech rights limited Reasoning: 1st amendment
33
New Jersey v TLO
1985 Background: TLO searched for suspected cigarettes, found marijuana Ruling: search was reasonable Precedent: restrictions against search and seizure only partly apply to school officials Reasoning: school need to maintain order/discipline, in loco parentis
34
New York Times v US*
1971 Background: government tried to stop NYT from publishing classified documents about the Vietnam War Ruling: NYT can publish papers Precedent: established heavy presumption against prior restraint Reasoning: 1st amendment
35
NY State Rifle and pistol Association v Bruen
2022 Background: NY state required special need to receive license for concealed handguns outside the home Ruling: NY law unconstitutional, must issue license on shall-issue basis Precedent: states can't restrict "right" to carry Reasoning: 14th & 2nd amendment protect handgun carry
36
Obergefell v Hodges
2015 Background: gay couples sued states over ban Ruling: right to marry applies to same sex couples as well Precedent: same sex marriage legal Reasoning: due process clause
37
Planned Parenthood v Casey
1992 Background: PA law required 24hr waiting period before abortion, needed spousal or parental consent Ruling: upheld the requirements except spousal consent Precedent: states can add restrictions to abortion Reasoning: spousal consent part unconstitutional because created undue burden, states can have special interest to restrict pregnancy
38
Plessy v Ferguson
1896 Background: Separate Car Act required separate railway cars for blacks and whites Ruling: law was constitutional Precedent: separate but equal Reasoning: equal protection clause
39
Regents of the University of California v Bakke
1976 Background: white Bakke rejected twice sued because excluded based on race Ruling: can't use quota system for affirmative action Precedent: can't use quotas but can consider diversity (since it is a state interest) Reasoning: violated Civil Rights Act of 1964, didn't violate equal protection
40
Roe v Wade*
1973 Background: "Roe" challenged TX abortion ban Ruling: can have abortion in 1st trimester Precedent: abortion protected by right to privacy Reasoning: due process clause and penumbra supporting right to privacy
41
Schenck v US*
1919 Background: socialists gave out leaflets saying the WWI draft violated the 13th amendment (involuntary servitude), charged with violating Espionage Act Ruling: Espionage Act didn't violate 1st amendment because was wartime Precedent: speech can be restricted if its a clear and present danger, gov has additional powers during wartime Reasoning: wasn't protected by the 1st because is advocated a crime (draft dodging) and led to clear and present danger
42
Shaw v Reno*
1993 Background: NC redistricting plan rejected because it only had one black district, created unusual, gerrymandered district Ruling: new district was unconstitutional Precedent: race can't be sole redistricting factor Reasoning: equal protection clause
43
Shelby County v Holder
2013 Background: Voting Rights Act of '65 section 5 keeps districts from changing election laws w/o approval, section 4(b) says districts eligible for section 5 had to have <50% turnout from '64 election and a voting test in place on November 1, 1964 Ruling: section 4 is unconstitutional Precedent: can't subject states to preclearance based on past discrimination Reasoning: constraints from '60s and '70s don't still apply today
44
Texas v Johnson
1989 Background: Johnson burned the US flag, jailed and fined Ruling: flag burning is protected speech Precedent: extended 1st amendment protection Reasoning: flag burning is protected by 1st amendment as it as symbolic speech
45
Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community Schools*
1969 Background: students suspended for wearing armbands protesting Vietnam War Ruling: armbands protected speech Precedent: symbolic speech protected by 1st amendment Reasoning: 1st amendment
46
US v Lopez*
1995 Background: Lopez arrested for violating federal law (Gun-Free School Zones Act) by carrying a gun in school Ruling: law is unconstitutional, exceeds commerce clause Precedent: gun possession not an economic activity, court restricts Congress Reasoning: guns don't have significant effect on interstate commerce
47
US v Nixon
1974 Background: Nixon claimed immunity to subpoena citing executive privilege Ruling: president can't withhold evidence Precedent: president can't shield himself from investigations Reasoning: separation of powers
48
West Virginia Board of Education v Barnette
1943 Background: required students to salute the flag during school Ruling: don't have to salute Precedent: expanded 1st amendment protections Reasoning: coercion does not create unity, 1st amendment
49
West Virginia v EPA
2022 Background: Trump repealed Clean Power Plan, postponing its guidelines, coal company challenged epa's power Ruling: EPA didn't have authority Precedent: EPA can't implement the Clean Power Plan Reasoning: Congress didn't give the EPA authority to set emissions caps,
50
Wisconsin v Yoder*
1972 Background: Wisconsin law required schooling until 16 but Amish parents ended children's public schooling at 8th grade Ruling: law unconstitutional Precedent: religious interests over school interest in education Reasoning: free exercise clause

Case Law Test (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions