case quest Flashcards
Shaw v Reno
Summary- Involved redistricting and gerrymandering on the basis of race, Reno rejected NC’s plan for new district bc there was already one majority-minority district–> so NC submitted new district plan w 2 majority-minority districts, new district drawn in a snake shape to contain minority-minority population, Shaw argued that it was unconst.
Court Issue/Const. ?- Did the NC residents’ claim that the State created a racially gerrymandered district, raise a valid constitutional issue under the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause?
Court Ruling- ruled in favor of Shaw, violates 14th Amend. Equal Protection Clause
Enduring Legacy- set foundation for future court cases surrounding gerrymandering on the basis of race and majority-minority districts
McDonald V Chicago
Summary- McDonald wished to purchase handgun to keep his family safe in south side of Chicago, turned away due to Chicago’s handgun ban, McDonald sued the city, and case was brought to SCOTUS in 2009
Constitution ?- Does the 2nd Amendment apply to states and their laws?
Court ruling- SCOTUS ruled right to bear arms is a 2nd Amen. right, ruling is backed by Due Process Clause of 14th Amen., Enforceable against the states
Enduring Legacy- purchasing a gun is legal in all states, anyone can purchase a gun w intent of self-defense, no state can deny due process led to select incorporation, transferred the ruling to all states, states can put restrictions on getting a gun but cannot deny gun possession
Dobbs V Jackson
Summary- Mississippi legislature (rep by Dobbs) passed a Gestational Age Act which limits the reach of abortion to before 15 weeks, Jackson Women’s Health Organization sued state over terms of this law
Const. ?- Are abortions a constitutional right?
Is the Gestational Age Act constitutional?
Court Ruling- Majority ruled in favor of overturning Roe V Casey, claims that Due Process Clause of 14th Amen. only applies to the rights guaranteed by the first 8 amendments and other fundamental rights by the 9th Amend., abortion isn’t a fundamental right bc it isn’t deeply rooted within our country’s tradition
Enduring legacy- a landmark decision in the US that will serve as precedent for future cases regarding abortion and healthcare, will have the same magnitude of Roe V Wade
Gideon V Wainright
Summary- Gideon robbed a pool room in FL and was arrested, Gideon couldn’t afford a lawyer and asked Florida Circuit Court judge to appoint him one arguing the 6th Amendment entitles everyone to a lawyer, judge denied request and Gideon was left to defend himself
Cons. ?- Should 6th Amendment right apply to noncapital cases?
states don’t have to provide defense in non-capital cases, 6th amend requires defendants to be appointed lawyer but FL law was that a defendant only received a lawyer in capital cases, 14 amend. states that states can’t deny due process to any citizen(depriving defendant right to an attorney is violation of due process rights)
Court Ruling- unanimous decision that if someone can’t afford and attorney then they must be provided one, brought 6th amend. down to the state
Enduring legacy- public defense system was created, allowed noncapital cases to provide defendants with attorney if they can’t afford one, brought 6th amend. down to the states
Marbury V Madison
Jefferson defeated Adams in presidential election, in order to hold control of fed courts Adams appointed 16 new judges and 42 new justices during Judiciary Act of 1801 (called Midnight Judges), also appointed Secretary of State John Marshall to Supreme Court Chief Justice, ended up detrimental bc with how busy Marshall was covering both jobs for remainder of Adam’s Presidency he was unable to confirm 4 of the new judges, these judges who were not confirmed didn’t receive their commission, Marbury (didn’t receive commission) petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus
Cons. ?- Do the plaintiffs have a right to their commission?
Can they sue for their commissions in court?
Does the Supreme Court have the authority to order the delivery of their commission?
Court Ruling- Majority ruled in favor of Marbury
stated it was illegal for Madision (Sec of State under Jefferson) to withhold their commission, however the judiciary branch was weak during this time and didn’t have the power to enforce this ruling, meaning Madison would not end up having to pay the judges commission, Judiciary Act of 1789 (found later to be unconstitutional which created judicial review) and Article 3 (created SCOTUS and lines their jurisdiction, says SCOTUS has too much power and no right to rule in favor of Marbury)
Enduring Legacy- created important part of judicial branch that helped to even out idea of separation of power- JUDICIAL REVIEW
Baker V Carr
Summary- Tennessee hadn’t reapportioned districts in over 60 yrs despite more people leaving rural areas to join urban areas, TN. State Constitution states that they need to reapportion districts every 10 years after the census comes out, Baker lived in Shelby County, TN, because of more people moving to urban areas without the state of TN reapportioning, their votes were worth less in urban areas than in rural areas
Cons. ?- Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction over questions of legislative appointment?
Yes bc of 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause (they don’t want to, this should be states problem)
Court Ruling- Majority ruling in favor of Baker, forced TN to reapportion based on population (urban-more votes, rural-less votes), because of 14 Amendment Equal Protection Clause
Enduring Legacy- allows fed courts to rule on reapportionment issues, fed courts can force a state to reapportion so that population is equal
Wisconsin V Yoder
Summary- Yoder pulled 15 yr old child out of school but Wisco law requires all students to stay until age 16, law violates 1st amendment of freely practicing religion
Const. ?- Does the law made by Wisconsin violate first amendment right to freely practice religion? (free exercise)
Court Ruling- majority ruling in favor of Yoder, free exercise of religion more important than states decision regarding education, court decided last 1-2 years of HS wouldn’t benefit Amish lifestyle, states violate first amendment free exercise clause
Enduring legacy- precedent set that parents may educate children outside of traditional schools in favor of religious beliefs, brought 14th amendment down to the states
New York Times V US
Summary- NY times wanted to publish material (Pentagon Papers), NYT argued that preventing the publication materials about US activity in Vietnam was violation of first amendment right of free press, US- Nixon administration argued that prior restraints was necessary to protect national security
Const. ?- Did attempting to prevent publication violate the first amendment freedom of press?
Court Ruling- Majority ruled in favor of NYT
found prior restraint wouldn’t be applicable in this situation bc publication wouldn’t cause danger to American forces
Enduring legacy- showed government can’t censor much, demonstrates limit of prior restraint and power of free press, gov must prove national security if they want prior restraint
US V Lopez
Summary- senior student Lopez carried concealed weapon onto school property
Const. ?- Was carrying a firearm on school grounds forbidden by gun-free school zones act?
gun free zone act was questioned to be unconstitutional since it exceeds the power of congress and legislate under commerce clause
Court ruling- Ruled in favor of Lopez based on the ground of the gun-free zones act, gun procession isn’t economic activity that has any impact on interstate commerce, GFSZA was unconstitutional, act was deemed to be criminal regulation
Enduring legacy- GRSZA was rewritten, all firearms used illegally deemed unconstitutional if through commerce, preserved ideas of federalism, gun violence is still a problem
Citizen United V FEC
Summary- citizen united (nonprofit conservation group) created film critical of Hilary Clinton and attempted to air it and advertisements for it on TV, violation of BCRA and was removed from TV because it was within 30 days of a primary
Const. ?- Does anti-corporation/corruption interest outweigh freedom of speech?
Court ruling- ruled in favor of citizens united
1st amendment free speech overrode concerns for corporate corruption, 1st amendment doesn’t differentiate between media and corruption, struck down BCRA
Enduring Legacy- let corporation create super PACs, money= free speech, corporations have same protections of speech that individuals have
Schenk V US
Summary- US in WW1, draft started, creation of the Espionage Act, socialist revolted against war, Schenk distributed pamphlets urging young men to go against the draft
Const. ?- Does Schenk conviction violate freedom of speech?
Did Schenk’s conviction under the Espionage Act for criticizing the draft violate the first amendment freedom of speech?
Court Ruling- unanimously ruled in favor of the US (not Schenk)
schenk’s actions intended to result in crime, created clear and present danger to enlist during state of war
Enduring legacy- created clear and present danger test because words can be used against you, especially in times of war, congress can limit freedom of speech if dangerous
