Court Cases Flashcards
Barron v. Baltimore (1833)
The Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights only applied to the national government and did not extend to state actions. Barron, a co-owner of a wharf in Baltimore Harbor, sued the city for losses due to sand accumulation, but the court held that he was not entitled to compensation under the Fifth Amendment
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Whether flag burning constitutes “symbolic speech” protected by the First Amendment. Johnson won, flag-burning was protected under 1st Amendment
District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)
Struck down DC bans on handguns
McDonald v. Chicago (2010)
Struck down Chicago ban on handguns. Incorporation of 2nd Amendment
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
A search warrant for a specific item is needed by the government
Kelo v. New London (2005)
Taking of property by government
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Entitled to a state attorney
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Right to remain silent
Anything you say can and will be used against you,… if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided to you
Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)
Right to Council
Furman v. Georgia (1972)
Cruel and unusual punishment
Barbarity
Punishment fits the crime
Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
Cruel and unusual punishment
Barbarity
Punishment fits the crime
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Privacy of bedroom was kept to self, rather than declared
Same-sex intercourse was illegal
United States v. Windsor (2013)
Same-sex marriage was challenged
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
Overturned DOMA
Legalized same-sex marriage
Bostick v. Clayton County (2020)
Transgender
Cannot discriminate someone over sex
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
Quotas for student count and teacher count
Bakke was rejected due to race quota, and he sued, and won
Quotas not allowed anymore, but racial quotas stayed to maintain racial diversity
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)
Use of race as a factor for admission and awarded points based on random numbers to people who had specific skills
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
Upheld the use of affirmative action by University of Michigan Law School (5v4)
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023)
Required colleges to stop using race as a factor in their admissions process
Students for Fair Admissions v. UNC (2023)
University of North Carolina’s affirmative action programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state-sanctioned segregation of public schools was unconstitutional, as it violated the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause
US v. Nixon (1974)
Court recognized the validity of executive privilege but argued that it did not apply in the case of Nixon’s White House Tapes
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Established the doctrine of judicial review (John Marshall)
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
The Court affirmed Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce and held that state laws must yield to constitutional acts of Congress3.
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Congress had the authority to establish a federal bank, and that the financial institution could not be taxed by the states
United States v. Lopez (1995)
The Supreme Court ruled that the law exceeded Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause because carrying a gun in a school zone is not an economic activity. It said that Congress may regulate only:
Schenck v. United States (1919)
Freedom of speech protection afforded in the U.S. Constitution ’s First Amendment could be restricted if the words spoken or printed represented to society a “clear and present danger.”
New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)
Court held that the government did not overcome the “heavy presumption against” prior restraint of the press in this case.
Shaw v. Reno
Court set a precedent that while race can be a factor in redistricting to ensure fair representation and compliance with the Voting Rights Act, it cannot be the predominant factor leading to districts that are inexplicable on grounds other than race. (Racial redistricting)
Baker v. Carr (1962)
U.S. Supreme Court held that redistricting qualifies as a justiciable question under the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause
