SCOTUS cases civil rights Flashcards
Burwell v Hobby Lobby 2014 outcome
5/4 split, ruled that that forcing the store to pay for health insurance (contraception) as it went against 1st amendment right
Burwelll v Hobby Lobby
R/A, limits on other branches.
active didnt defer to congress
limited congress and obama as it weakened ACA
Snyder v Phelps outcome 2011
8-1 that WBC picketing of a funeral was protected by 1st amendment even if the speech was offensive
Snyder v Phelps 2011 r/a
restraint defer to 1st amendment
Carson v makin 2022 outcome
6/3 desicion that restrictions on school vouchers against religious private school was discriminatory
Carson v makin 2022 activism vs restraint
Court was active, ruled again against Maine
Kennedy v bremerton school district 2022 outcome
court ruled it was wrong for a teachers contract to be ended over him praying during game time as it went against free speech and distrcit had no righ to limit religious oractises
kennedy v bremerton a/r
active as ruled against the lower courts decision to support the court
creative llc v elenis 2021 outcome
court ruled 6-3 that a graphic designer had the irghts to explicitly not offer services to gay couples on religious grounds
creative llc v elenis 2021 r/a, changes to rights
active, ruled against stae court of colarado and upheld the designers rights.
mc donald v chicago 2010 outcome
following dc v heller case court ruled 5-4 that the =right to bear arms is fundamentally protected and cant be infringed by the state
mc donald v chigaco 2010 r/a and rights
restraint deferred to past precedent dc vheller and protected right to bear arms against state infringemnt
bruen case 2022 outcome
ruled it was a 2nd amendement right to carry a concealed and loaded handgun in public.
bruen cas 2022 a/r
active as it removed parts of bidens bipartisan gun bill
miranda v arizona 1966 outcome
court ruled 5-4 that miranda had been denied the right to remain silnce when he confessed to rape
Bucklew v precythe case 2019 outcome
Man ooh death row argued a condition would make lethal injection tortuous court ruled 5-4 that execution would go ahead as death sentence isn’t guaranteed to be painless
Dobbs v jackson 2022 outcome
6-3 ruled that abortion isn’t a constitutional right and reversed lower court rulings and repealed roe v wade
Dobbs v jackson 2022 active / restraint
Acted in quasi legislative way and went against presidents wishes. Limited right abortion but upheld federalism
Percentage that disapproved of dobbs v Jackson
60% in polling and a majority in every state disapproved
Shelby county v holder 2013 outcome
5-4 to remove the coverage formula to VRA which required states with history of racism to get federal clearance to implement voting laws
Shelby counter v holder activism activism / restraint
Active went against precedent
Removed parts of VRA
Resulted in many being removed from voting
Allen v Milligan 2023 outcome
5-4 desicion that Alabama redistricting that led to one remaining black majority district and was accused of gerrymandering.
Sc rule this did not violate section 2 VRA
Gratz v Bollinger 2003 outcome
6-3 struck down a points based system that automatically awarded points to minority applicants ( to mechanistic)
Grutter v Bollinger 2003 outcome
5-4 ruling that michigan law schools AA programme was constitutional as it took an individualised approach
grutter case time limit
in 25 years 2028 SCOTUS expected that affirmative action wouldnt be needed
regents case v bakke 1978
racial quotas ruled unconstitutional, but race could be considered a factor in college admissions
meredith v jefferson county 2007
5-4 unconstitutional to assign students to public schools solely for racial balance
Fisher v Texas 2016
4-3 ruling upheld texas AA programme and recognised the benefits of diversity in college
SFFA v North Carolina 2023 decsion
6-3 ruling that programme couldnt continue and race could only be considered inder very specific circumstances
SFFA v Havard 2023 decsion
6-3 programme could no longer use race as a factor
impact of SFFA vs north carolina/ havard
set a precedent for court to weaken limit remove affirmative action programmes
