Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

US Government - Paper 3 > SC cases > Flashcards

SC cases Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
AP® U.S. Government flashcards U.S. Government Basics flashcards American Government 101 flashcards U.S. Geography flashcards
1
Q

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

A
  • Racial segregation in public schools was deemed a violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
  • This case overturned the precedent set by Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which upheld ‘separate but equal’ doctrine.
  • Helped inspire the American civil rights movement of the late 1950s and ’60s, leading to further legislation against discrimination.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Texas v. Johnson (1989)

A
  • SC ruled that burning the American flag is a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment.
  • The ruling emphasised that the government cannot punish actions simply because they might offend others.
  • This case highlighted the tension between national symbols and individual rights.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

A
  • Established the requirement for law enforcement to inform individuals of their rights before interrogation, known as ‘Miranda Rights.’
  • The ruling aimed to protect the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
  • This case underscored the importance of due process in the criminal justice system.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Gonzales v. Raich (2005)

A
  • The SC ruled that Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce, which includes local marijuana use.
  • Conflict between California’s Compassionate Use Act and the Federal Controlled Substances Act
  • This case raised questions about states’ rights versus federal authority in drug regulation.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

DC v. Heller (2008)

A
  • The Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess firearms for self-defense within the home.
  • This decision struck down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban as unconstitutional.
  • The ruling has significant implications for gun control laws across the United States.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Citizens United v. FEC (2010)

A
  • The SC ruled that corporations and unions can spend unlimited money on political campaigns under the First Amendment.
  • This decision led to the rise of Super PACs and increased influence of money in politics.
  • The ruling sparked ongoing debates about campaign finance reform and political corruption.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

NFIB v. Sebelius (2012)

A
  • The Court upheld the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), ruling that the individual mandate is constitutional as a tax.
  • This case was pivotal in determining the future of healthcare in America and the role of government in providing health insurance.
  • The ruling highlighted the balance between individual rights and government regulation.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Shelby v. Holder (2013)

A
  • The Court invalidated key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, arguing that the formula for determining which jurisdictions required federal approval for changes to voting laws was outdated.
  • This decision raised concerns about voter suppression and discrimination in states with a history of voting rights violations.
  • The ruling has led to various states enacting laws that critics argue disenfranchise voters.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014)

A
  • The SC ruled that closely held corporations can refuse to provide contraceptive coverage based on religious objections under the RFRA.
  • This case raised significant questions about the intersection of corporate rights and religious freedom.
  • The ruling has implications for women’s health rights and employer-provided healthcare.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

McCutcheon v. FEC (2014)

A

Campaign Finance.
- The SC ruled that limits on individual contributions to federal candidates, political parties, and PACs were unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

  • Allowed individuals to contribute to as many candidates as they wish, provided they do not exceed individual limits.
  • Further opened the door for increased political spending by individuals and organizations. Criticized for potentially increasing the influence of money in politics, raising concerns about corruption and the integrity of elections.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

NLRB v. Canning (2014)

A

Executive power.
- The SC ruled that a three-day break in Congress was not sufficient to constitute a recess, thereby nullifying President Obama’s appointments made during that period.

  • Reinforcing the need for congressional oversight. Emphasised importance of the Senate’s role in the appointment process > cannot bypass this requirement during short breaks.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)

A

Marriage Equality.
- The SC ruled that state bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, affirming the right to marry under the 14th Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.

  • Legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. Marriage is a fundamental right, cannot be denied based on sexual orientation.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Texas v. United States (2016)

A

Immigration Policy.
- The SC said that DAPA could not be implemented without following the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).

  • Highlighted the limits of executive power in immigration policy.Emphasised importance of adhering to established procedures for enacting significant policy changes, particularly those affecting millions of individuals.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016)

A

2nd Amendment Rights.
- The SC ruled that stun guns are protected under the 2nd Amendment, reinforcing the right to bear arms.

  • Expanded the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment to include modern weapons, affirming the right to possess non-traditional arms for self-defense.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Carpenter v. United States (2018)

A

Privacy Rights.
- The SC ruled that law enforcement must obtain a warrant to access cell phone location records, reinforcing 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.

  • Recognised need for judicial oversight in accessing personal information.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Trump v. Karnoski (2019)

A

Transgender Rights.
- The Court ruled that the proposed ban on military service for transgender individuals was unconstitutional under the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses.

  • Allowed transgender individuals to serve openly in the military.
17
Q

Bucklew v. Precythe (2019)

A

Death Penalty.
- The SC ruled that an inmate must demonstrate a better alternative to challenge an execution method.

  • Missouri’s lethal injection method did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, despite Bucklew’s medical condition.
18
Q

Fulton v. Philadelphia (2021)

A

Religious Freedom.
- The Court ruled unanimously that Philadelphia’s ban on the Catholic Church’s foster care services violated the Free Exercise of Religion clause.

  • Importance of religious organisations’ rights to operate according to their beliefs, particularly in public service roles.
  • The case reflects ongoing tensions between religious liberty and civil rights protections.
19
Q

New York Pistol & Rifle Association v. Bruen (2022)

A

Gun Rights.
- The SC ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the right to carry a gun outside the home for self-defense, striking down New York’s ‘proper cause’ requirement for concealed carry permits.

  • This decision expanded gun rights and limited states’ ability to impose subjective criteria on gun ownership.
20
Q

Carson v. Makin (2022)

A

Education and Religious Freedom.
- The Court ruled that Maine’s exclusion of religious schools from its school voucher program violated the Free Exercise of Religion clause.

  • The ruling emphasises the importance of equal access to public funding for religious and non-religious schools alike.
  • Debates about the separation of church and state in education.
21
Q

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022)

A

Prayer in Schools.
- The Court ruled that football coach’s personal prayer on the field after games is protected by the 1st Amendment’s Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses.

  • The ruling emphasises the importance of individual rights to express religious beliefs, even in public institutions.
22
Q

Dobbs v. Jackson (2022)

A

Abortion Rights.
- The SC overturned Roe v. Wade, ruling that the Constitution does not protect the right to an abortion.
- Implications for reproductive rights and state-level abortion laws across the country.

23
Q

Allen v. Milligan (2022)

A

Voting Rights.
- The Court ruled that Alabama’s congressional district boundaries violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black voters’ representation.

  • Protected minority voting rights
  • Emphasises the importance of fair representation in electoral processes and the need to address gerrymandering.
24
Q

NFIB v. Department of Labor (2022)

A

Public Health.
- The SC ruled against the Biden administration’s mandate requiring vaccinations for workers in large companies.

  • Limits on executive power in public health measures.
  • The ruling reflects ongoing debates about individual rights versus collective health responsibilities during emergencies.
25
Q

Biden v. Nebraska (2023)

A

Student Debt Relief
- The SC ruled that the Biden administration’s student debt relief plan was unlawful.

  • Emphasising the limits of executive authority in financial matters.
  • Implications for student loan policies and the future of debt relief initiatives.
26
Q

Department of Homeland Security v. Texas (2024)

A

Immigration Policy.
- The SC addressed the federal government’s actions regarding immigration enforcement and border security measures.

  • Reflects ongoing tensions between state and federal authority in immigration policy and enforcement.
27
Q

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)

A
  • The military commissions established to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay were illegal.
  • Requiring that he be tried by a “regularly constituted court that follow established legal standards.
28
Q

What case made it easier for state officials to engage in vote suppression.

A

Section 4(b) and 5 of Voting Rights Act (1965) are ruled unenforceable by the SC rulings Shelby v. Holder (2013) that requiring certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance based on their history of racial discrimination in voting before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices, is unconstitutional.

29
Q

Fisher v. University of Texas (2013)

A

SC ruled that Affirmative Actions in universities admission should be strictly scrutinised. Overturned by Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023) that race-conscious admissions are unconstitutional.

30
Q

Loving v. Virginia (1967)

A

SC ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

31
Q

Example of SC can strike down executive orders that violate human rights

A

Trump’s travel ban (Executive Order 13769) was blocked by Washington v. Trump (2017) with the ruling of abrogation of equality protection under the law

32
Q

Example of a case protected by Free Speech (1st Amendment)

A

Snyder v. Phelps (2011)
- SC ruled that speech made in a public place on a matter of public concern cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress, even if the speech is viewed as offensive or outrageous. (7 members of The Westboro Church picketed the funeral of U.S. Marine Matthew Snyder, protesters displayed placards that read “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”)

33
Q

Example of a case protected by Right to Bear Arms (2nd Amendment)

A

D.C. v. Heller (2008)
- SC ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defence or whether the right was only intended for state militias, and D.C. banning gun control violated this guarantee.

34
Q

Example of two cases that protected LGBTQ+ and women rights

A
  1. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
    - SC ruled that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
  2. Roe v. Wade (1973)
    - SC ruled that the Constitution of the US generally protected a right to have an abortion. Overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) which returned to individual states the power to regulate any aspect of abortion.
35
Q

SpeechNow.org v. FEC

A
  1. SC ruled that the contribution limits set by FECA were unconstitutional when applied to individuals’ contributions to SpeechNow.org
    - Led to the creation of “Super PACs”
    - Based its decision on 1st Amendment rights, the government has no anti-corruption interest in limiting contributions to independent expenditure groups

US Government - Paper 3 (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions