Exam 2 - Coupling Cases Flashcards
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Protected the accused by granting them the right to legal counsel in both capital and non-capital cases, regardless of the ability to pay for an attorney.
Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968)
Protects the accused by preventing the prosecution from imposing a “stacked” jury panel. The prosecution no longer has an unlimited number of juror challenges in capital cases.
Linkage: “Protecting the accused in a criminal trial.”
United States v. Virginia (1996)
Male-only admissions at state-sponsored military academies were unconstitutional. This case concerned VMI (Virginia Military Institute). This concerned the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)
Upheld Affirmative Action at the University of Michigan graduate school, but not the undergraduate.
Linkage: “Affirmative Action in higher education.”
Loving v. Virginia (1967)
Struck down all state laws that banned “inter-racial marriage.” Prior to 1967, some states made it a criminal offense to engage in an inter-racial marriage, and subject to prison time.
Goodrich v. Department of Public Health (2004)
Massachusetts institutes “same-sex marriage,” becoming the first state in the Union to do so.
Linkage: “The right to marriage.”
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (1998)
Dealt with sexual harassment in the workplace, which was not mentioned in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (and with the ambiguity that can exist in law).
United States v. Williams (2007)
Extended the ban on child pornography to include computer-generated images that merely appear to be those of children.
Linkage: “Sex crimes”
Lundman v. First Church of Christ (1993)
Parents are not protected from prosecution for failing to provide their children with necessary medical treatment if it is the result of a religious prohibition.
Zelman v. Simmons (2002)
Upheld the use of school-supported vouchers to attend private or parochial school (school vouchers).
Linkage: “Free expression of religion.”
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
A suspect must be read his/her rights upon arrest. The suspect has the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney, etc. (Ernesto Miranda case).
Dickerson v. United States (2000)
Upheld the 1966 Miranda Decision 34 years later.
Linkage: “Read me my rights.”
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Based on the 9th Amendment right to privacy and the entirety of the Bill of Rights, a woman has a right to an abortion.
Gonzalez v. Carhart (2007)
Court reversed stance on partial-birth abortion, largely due to the replacement of Sandra Day O’Connor with Samuel Alito as an associate justice on the Court.
Linkage: “Abortion rights.”
Buckley v. Valeo (1978)
Declared that “money is speech” and therefore protected by the 1st Amendment. A candidate is entitled to spend as much of their own money as they wish in order to win office.
Three-time mayor Michael Bloomberg of NYC spent $110 of his own money to win re-election in 2009. Bloomberg earlier spent $70 million of his own money for his 2001 election and $85 million for his 2005 election.
Citizens United v. Federal Election (2010)
Lifted the restrictions in corporate and union spending in federal election campaigns. A major victory for corporations and unions in their ability to influence elections through money.
Linkage: “Campaign finance decisions.”
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Example of de jure integration.
De jure: According to rightful entitlement or claim; by right.
Swann v. Charlotte (1971)
Court held that busing was an appropriate remedy for the problem of racial imbalance in schools, even when the imbalance resulted from the selection of students based on geographic proximity to the school rather than from deliberate assignment based on race. Example of de facto integration.
De facto: In fact, or in effect, whether by right or not.
McNabb v. United States (1943)
All suspects are entitled to due process. In 1971, the 5th Amendment guaranteed due process in cases concerning the federal government, but did not extend this to state governments.
In 1868, the 14th Amendment guaranteed due process in cases concerning the states.
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)
Ruled that the tribunals were unlawful because they did not provide due process nor even minimal protections of detainees’ rights at Guantanamo.
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Gave extreme power to the Judicial Branch over the other two branches of federal government.
This was the Court’s power to declare legislative action or executive action as unconstitutional. Also gives strength to the principles of separation of powers and system of checks and balances.
John Marshall - principle of judicial review.
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Interpretation gave extreme “implied power” to the federal government, at the expense of the states.
According to Article 1, Section 8, Article 18 of the Constitution (Necessary and Proper Clause), the federal government was allowed to imply power for the general well-being of the nation, presumably in case of a crisis situation.
However, the Court’s decision went far beyond what was authorized in the Constitution, allowing the federal government to imply power even when no crisis nor emergency existed.
John Marshall - principle of implied powers.
Linkage: “Principles of federal power.”
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Upheld the Jim Crow segregation laws of the Southern states, even though these laws were a direct violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Further upheld all segregation laws in the US, provided that those laws reflected the principle of “separate but equal.”
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Upheld the internment and relocation of 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII, 70,000 of which were US citizens. It was a triple violation of the US Constitution: 14th Amendment, Habeas Corpus, and Bill of Attainder.
Linkage: Equal Protection Clause violation.
Schneck v. United States (1919)
Freedom of speech can be limited if it creates a “clear and present danger” such as protesting against US involvement in WWI while the war was being fought.
This decision was made by the greatly overpraised Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.
Dennis v. United States (1951)
Speech considered criminal in this violation was extreme Communist rhetoric and agitation during the early days of the Cold War.
Occurred in the aftermath of the Soviets obtaining the atomic bomb and China falling to Chairman Mao Tse-tung and the Communists, both in 1949.
Linkage: “Freedom of speech is not an absolute freedom. In times of crisis, citizens are often denied their civil liberties.”
Hutto v. Davis (2008)
Principle of of “following legal precedent.”
Adherence to ‘state decisis’ (legal precedent) provides legal consistency that can prevent confusion and legal complexity in future cases.
D.C. v. Heller (2008)
Concerned gun control in Washington D.C. and the true meaning of “state militia,” which was inserted into the language of the Second Amendment.
“Strict Constructionist justices seek to make rulings with extreme regard to what the Founding Fathers intended back in 1787.”
Linkage: “Legal principles of government.”
Bowers v. Hardwick (1986)
Court refused to overturn state laws that criminalized sodomy between consenting couples.
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Reversed the Bowers 1986 Decision from 17 years earlier, striking down state laws throughout the country concerning the issue of sodomy.
Linkage: “Federal power versus states’ rights.”
