Ch. 5-6 Court Cases Flashcards

0
Q

Palko v. Connecticut

A

States must observe all “fundamental” liberties

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

Gitlow v. New York

A

1st Amend. applies to states

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

McDonald v. Chicago

A

2nd Amend. allows people to keep and bear arms applies to state gov. as well as the federal one.

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

Schenck v. United States

A

Speech may be punished if it creates a clear and present danger test of illegal acts

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

Chaplinksy v. New Hampshire

A

“Fighting words” are not protected by 1st Amend.

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

New York v. Sullivan

A

To libel a public figure, there must be actual malice

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

Tinker v. Dos Moines

A

Public school students may wear armbands to class protesting against Ame. war in Vietnam as long as it doesn’t disrupt class.

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

Miller v. California

A

Obscenity defined as appealing to prurient interests of an average person with materials that lack literary, artistic, political or scientific value

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

Texas v. Johnson

A

There may not be a law to ban flag burning

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

Reno v. ACLU

A

A law that band sending “indecent” material to minors over the internet is unconstitutional because “indecent” is too vague and broad.

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

FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life

A

Prohibits campaign finance reform law from banning political advocacy

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

Citizens United v. FEC

A

Part of the McCain- Feingold campaign finance reform law that prevents corporations and labor unions from spending money on advertisements independent of political candidates or parties, in political campaigns is unconstitutional.

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

Pierce v. Society of Sisters

A

States may not require that students attend only public schools

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

Everson v. Board of Edu.

A

The wall-of-separation principle is announced

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

Zorauch v. Clauson

A

States may not allow students to be released from public schools to attend religious instruction

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

Engel v. Vitale

A

There may not be a prayer, even a nondenominational one, in public schools

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

Lemon v. Kurtzman

A

3 tests are described for deciding whether the gov. is improperly involved with religion

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

Lee v. Weisman

A

Public schools may not have clergy lead prayers at graduation ceremonies

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

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe

A

Students may not lead prayers before the start of a football game at a public school

19
Q

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris

A

Voucher plans to pay school bills is upheld

20
Q

Mapp v. Ohio

A

Evidence illegally gathers by the police may not be used in a criminal trial

21
Q

Gideon v. Wainwright

A

Persons charged with a crime have a right to an attorney even if they cannot afford one

22
Q

Miranda v. Arizona

A

Court describes warning that police must give to arrested persons

23
Q

United States v. Leon

A

Illegally obtained evidence nah not be used in a trial if it was gathered in good faith without violating the principles of the Mapp decision

24
Dickerson v. United States
The Mapp decision is based on the Constitution and cannot be altered by Congress passing a law
25
Rasul v. Bush and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
Terrorist detainees must have access to a neutral court to decide if they are legally held
26
Dred Scott case, Scott v. Sanford
Congress had no authority to ban slavery in a territory. A slave was considered a piece of property.
27
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Upheld separate by equal facilities for white and black people on railroad cars
28
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Said separate public schools are inherently unequal, thus starting racial desegregation
29
Green v. County School Board of New Kent County
Banned a freedom of choice plan for integrating schools, suggesting blacks and whites must actually attend racially mixed schools
30
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Edu.
Approved busing and redrawing district lines as ways of integrating public schools
31
Reed v. Reed
Gender discrimination violates the equal protection clause of the Const.
32
Craig v. Brown
Gender discrimination can be justified only if it serves "important governmental objectives" and is "substantially related to those objectives"
33
Rostker v. Goldberg
Congress can draft men without drafting women
34
United States v. Virginia
State may not finance an all-male military school
35
Griswold v. Connecticut
Found a "right to privacy" in the Const. that would ban any state law against selling contraceptives
36
Roe v. Wade
States laws against abortion were unconstitutional
37
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services
Allowed states to ban abortions from public hospitals and permitted doctors to test to see if fetuses were viable
38
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
Reaffirmed Roe v. Wade but upheld certain limits on its use
39
Gonzales v. Carhart
Federal law may ban certain forms of partial birth abortion
40
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
A quota like ban on Bakke's admission was unconstitutional but that "diversity" was a legitimate goal that could be pursued by taking race into account
41
United Steelworkers v. Weber
Upheld the use of race in an employment agreement between the steelworkers union and steel plant
42
Richmond v. Croson
Affirmative action plans just be judged by the struck scrutiny standard that requires any race-conscious plan to be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest
43
Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger
Numerical benefits cannot be used to admit minorities into college, but rage can be a "plus factor" in making those decisions
44
Parents v. Seattle School District
Race cannot be used to decide which students may attend especially popular high schools because this was not "narrowly tailored" to achieve a "compelling" goal
45
Lawrence v. Texas
State law may not ban sexual relations between same sex partners
46
Boy Scouts of America v. Fake
A private organization may ban gays from it's membership