Key Court Cases - Reverse

Question 1

Established judicial review; “midnight judges;” John Marshall; power of the Supreme Court.

Answer 1

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Question 2

Established national supremacy; established implied powers; use of elastic clause; state unable to tax fed. Institution; John Marshall; “the power to tax involves the power to destroy.”

Answer 2

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

Question 3

Established separate but equal.

Answer 3

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Question 4

Oliver Wendell Holmes; clear and present danger test; shouting “fire” in a crowded theater; limits on speech, esp. in wartime.

Answer 4

Schenck V. U.S. (1919)

Question 5

Established precedent of federalizing Bill of Rights (applying them to the states); states cannot deny freedom of speech -–protected through due process clause of Amendment 14

Answer 5

Gitlow v. New York (1925)

Question 6

Provided test for determining which parts of Bill of Rights should be federalized – those which are implicitly or explicitly necessary for liberty to exist.

Answer 6

Palko v. Connecticut (1937)

Question 7

School segregation unconstitutional; segregation psychologically damaging to blacks; overturned separate but equal; use of 14th Amendment; judicial activism of Warren Court; unanimous decision.

Answer 7

Brown v. Board, 1st (1954)

Question 8

Ordered schools to desegregate “with all due and deliberate speed.”

Answer 8

Brown v. Board, 2nd (1955)

Question 9

Established exclusionary rule; illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in court; Warren Court’s judicial activism.

Answer 9

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

Question 10

Prohibited state-sponsored recitation of prayer in public schools by virtue of Amendment One’s establishment clause and the 14th Amendment’s due process clause; Warren Court’s judicial activism.

Answer 10

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Question 11

“One man, one vote.” Ordered state legislative districts to be as near equal as possible in population; Warren Court’s political judicial activism.

Answer 11

Baker v. Carr (1962)

Question 12

Prohibited devotional Bible reading in public schools by virtue of establishment clause and due process clause. Warren Court’s judicial activism.

Answer 12

Abbington v. Schempp (1963)

Question 13

Ordered states to provide lawyers for those unable to afford them in criminal proceedings. Warren Court’s judicial activism in criminal rights.

Answer 13

Gideon v. Wainright (1963)

Question 14

Ordered House districts to be as near equal in population as possible.

Answer 14

Wesberry v. Sanders (1963)

Question 15

Established right of privacy through 4th and 9th Amendments. Set a precedent for Roe v. Wade.

Answer 15

Griswald v. Connecticut (1965)

Question 16

Established Miranda warnings of counsel and silence. Must be given before questioning. Warren Court’s judicial activism in criminal rights.

Answer 16

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Question 17

Allowed states to provide textbooks and busing to students attending private religious schools. Established 3-part test to determine if establishment clause is violated: nonsecular purpose, advances/inhibits religion, excessive entanglement with government.

Answer 17

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

Question 18

Established national abortion guidelines; trimester guidelines: no state interference in 1st, state may regulate to protect health of mother in 2nd, state may regulate to protect health of unborn child in 3rd. Inferred from right of privacy estab. in Griswald v. Conn.

Answer 18

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Question 19

Allowed for executive privilege, but not in criminal cases; “Even the President is not above the law;” Watergate.

Answer 19

U.S. v. Nixon (1974)

Question 20

1st Amendment protects campaign spending; legislatures can limit contributions, but not how much one spends of his own money on campaigns.

Answer 20

Buckley v. Valeo (1976)

Question 21

Alan Bakke and UC Davis Medical School; strict quotas unconst., but states may allow race to be taken into account as ONE factor in admissions decisions. Bakke admitted.

Answer 21

U.C. Regents v. Bakke (1978)

Question 22

More leeway for states in regulating abortion, though no overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Answer 22

Webster v. Reproductive 
Health Services (1987)

Question 23

Struck down Texas law that banned flag burning, which is a protected form of symbolic speech.

Answer 23

Texas v. Johnson (1989)

Question 24

States could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual.

Answer 24

Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith (1990)

Question 25

States can regulate abortion, but not with regulations that impose “undue burden” upon women; did not overturn Roe v. Wade, but gave states more leeway in regulating abortion (e.g., 24-hour waiting period, parental consent for minors)

Answer 25

Planned Parenthood v.

Casey (1992)

Question 26

No racial gerrymandering; race cannot be the sole or predominant factor in redrawing legislative boundaries; majority-minority districts.

Answer 26

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

Question 27

Gun Free School Zones Act exceeded Congress’ authority to regulate interstate commerce.

Answer 27

U.S. v. Lopez (1995)

Question 28

Banned presidential use of line item veto

Answer 28

Clinton v. NY (1998)

Question 29

Use of 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause to stop the Florida recount in the election of 2000.

Answer 29

Bush v. Gore (2000)

Question 30

Public money can be used to send disadvantaged children to religious schools in tuition voucher programs.

Answer 30

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)

Question 31

Struck down a federal ban on “virtual” child pornography

Answer 31

Ashcroft v. ACLU (2002)

Question 32

Using right of privacy, struck down Texas law banning sodomy.

Answer 32

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

Question 33

Struck down use of “bonus points” for race in undergrad admissions at University of Michigan.

Answer 33

Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

Question 34

Allowed the use of race as a general factor in law school admissions at University of Michigan.

Answer 34

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)

Question 35

Eminent domain case: Local governments may force the sale of private property and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public.

Answer 35

Kelo v. City of New London (2005)

Question 36

Upheld Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.

Answer 36

Gonzales v. Carhart (2007)

Question 37

Struck down a Washington DC ordinance that banned handguns

Answer 37

DC v. Heller (2008)