Court Cases

Question 1

Atkins v Virginia

Answer 1

Retard gets accused of crime, was sentenced to death. Appealed to court saying can’t kill me cuz I retard. Supreme court is questioning if execute retard is cruel and unusual punishment, prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. They say yes.

Question 2

Barron v Baltimore

Answer 2

Courts rule that Bill of Rights applies only to the National Government

Question 3

Baker v Carr

Answer 3

One man one vote

Question 4

Brown v Board of Education

Answer 4

Separate but equal

Question 5

Engel v Vitale

Answer 5

Does reading of nondemonational prayer at the start of school day violate establishment of religion clause. Yes it does

Question 6

Oregon v Smith

Answer 6

Some random redskins get fucked up on peyote. Employers are like “WTF” and fire them. They appeal to court bitching about how it’s their religion. Courts say fuck off, religious beliefs doesn’t excuse them from compliance with otherwise valid laws.

Question 7

Everson v Board of Education

Answer 7

New Jersey law gives Catholic School kids reimbursement for public bus fares to get to school. Court is asked if this violated the Establishment Clause of First Amendment. They say no

Question 8

Gideon v Wainright

Answer 8

Gideon did crime, appeared in court with no attorney, states didn’t give him one when asked. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state courts are required under the Fourteenth Amendment to provide counsel in criminal cases. Extended 6th Amendment to states.

Question 9

Gitlow v New York

Answer 9

Supreme Court ruled that it is within the state’s power to prevent the disturbance of the peace and regulate speech that may incite crime even if the threat of such action is not immediate. Freedom of speech and press do not confer an absolute right to publish or speak without being held responsible for the results of such speech. The state may regulate to protect its interests in general welfare of its citizens.

Question 10

Griswold v Connecticut

Answer 10

Planned Parenthood Director convicted under law which criminalized provision of contraceptives. Supreme Court ruled that through the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 9th amendments, new right to privacy. Connecticut statute conflicts with exercise of this right and is null.

Question 11

Heart of Atlanta Motel v US

Answer 11

Motel refused to serve blacks, violating Civil Rights Act title 2. Question was if Congress exceeded its Commerce Clause powers, Congress held that Commerce Clause allowed Congress to regulate local incidents of commerce.

Question 12

Lemon v Kurtzman

Answer 12

Rhode Island made state financial aid available to church-related educational institutions. Courts ruled that this violated First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Started Lemon Test.

Question 13

Lynch v Donnelly

Answer 13

Pawtucket, RI had a Christmas display including a nativity scene. Question was if it had violated Establishment Clause. Courts ruled no, saying that it was not important enough to be considered an effort to advocate a particular religious message.

Question 14

Mapp v Ohio

Answer 14

Mapp had obscene materials found after an illegal search by police. Court decided to declare that all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is to be excluded by Courts. Exclusion Rule.

Question 15

Miller v California

Answer 15

Miller, conducts mass campaign to advertise porn. California prohibits distribution of porn. Court decided that obscene materials did not enjoy First Amendment Protection.

Question 16

Miranda v Arizona

Answer 16

Miranda arrested, questioned, and confessed. Police used it as evidence in trial, but admitted they didn’t tell him about his right to have an attorney. Court ruled that 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination extend to the police interrogation of a suspect.

Question 17

Planned Parenthood v Casey

Answer 17

Pennsylvania legislature amended abortion control law. Law restricted abortions. Court asked if this broke Roe v Wade. Court upheld Roe , but also upheld Pennsylvania provisions. Started a new standard, which asks whether a state abortion regulation has purpose or effect of imposing an undue burden on woman.

Question 18

Reynolds v US

Answer 18

George Reynolds, Morman who wanted to marry many wives, challenged anti bigamy statute. Reynolds convicted in Utah. Question is if anti bigamy statute violates First Amendment’s free exercise clause. Court said no, stating that it did not judge practices that were criminal.

Question 19

Roe v Wade

Answer 19

Roe wanted abortion. Texas law said no. Roe sued. Court was asked if constitution embraced woman’s right to abortion. Court said yes, saying it was under right to privacy under Griswold v Connecticut.

Question 20

Roper v Simmons

Answer 20

Roper, a minor, was sentenced to death. After Atkins v Virginia, which said retard execution is cruel and unusual, they appealed to this for minors. Court agreed that minor execution is cruel and unusual.

Question 21

Schenk v US

Answer 21

WW1 Schenck mailed circulars to draftees, telling them to appose the draft. Court question was if Schenck actions are protected by free speech. Court ruled no, saying that “clear and present danger” is not protected speech.

Question 22

University of California Regents v Bakke

Answer 22

Bakke, a white man, twice applied to med school, rejected. Less qualified niggers and other minorities got spots reserved just because of their race. Questioned if U of Cal violated Equal protection clause. Court ruling was complex, but essentially they allowed race to be a criteria for admission in higher education.

Question 23

Texas v Johnson

Answer 23

Johnson burned God Bless American flag. Texas convicted him. Court ruled that flag burning was protected expression under First Amendment.

Question 24

Tinker v Des Moines

Answer 24

Students decided to wear armbands to protest Nam war. School suspended them. Went to court, and Court ruled that armbands represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it.Court protected symbolic speech, and school could only suspend students if it caused a disruption.

Question 25

West Virginia Board of Education v Barnette

Answer 25

Much like a facist dictatorship, West Virginia required flag salute in school, refusal equaled insubordination and suspension/expulsion. Court held that compelling schoolchildren to salute flag was unconstitutional. Compulsory unification of opinion was antithetical to First Amendment values.