court cases 31-37 Flashcards
schenck v united states
summary: during WW1 schenck mailed circulars to draftees. the drafts suggested that the draft was motivated by a capitalist system and to advised peaceful action. schenck was charged with conspiracy.
amendment: 1st amendment
resolution: he was not protected by the first amendment in this case and created a clear and present danger.
shaw v reno
summary: The US attorney general rejected North carolina’s redistrict plans because there was only 1-2 black majority districts. NC residents challenged this saying the only purpose was to secure additional black representatives.
constitution: 14th amendment
resolution: the district court was to decide whether government interest justified north carolina’s plan.
shelley v kramer
summary: the kramers (white couple) owned a home in a neighborhood which had an agreement to prevent blacks from living there but the shelley’s (black couple) moved in the neighborhood and the kramer’s portioned the court to enforce the agreement.
constitution: the 14th amendment
summary: the enforcement by state court injunctions constitute state action in violation of the 14th amendment.
texas v johnson
summary: johnson was charged for burning an american flag in protest; the burning was illegal under texas law.
constitution: 1st amendment
resolution: johnson was protected under the 1st amendment. the freedom of expression.
tinker v des moines (school district)
summary: the tinker siblings protested the vietnam war by wearing black armbands to school during the holiday season. in fear of aggression between students the principal stated that those who wore the armbands would be suspended. the siblings wore them again and got suspended.
constitution: 1st amendment
resolution: wearing the arm bands were protected under the 1st amendment
united states v o’brien
summary: o’brien had burned his draft card outside a boston court house. he was convicted because destruction of draft cards were a crime.
constitution: 1st amendment
resolution: His actions were not expressive and that even if he destroyed it privately he was still guilty.
united steel workers v weber
summary: the company had implemented a program to increase the number of black skilled craft workers. spots were reserved for them and weber (white) claimed he was discriminated against because he was passed over for the program.
constitution: Title 7 of the 1964 civil rights act
resolution: the act did not intend to profit i the private sector from taking effective steps.
