Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Component 3: USA Gov. and politics > US SC and civil rights > Flashcards

US SC and civil rights Flashcards

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

List criticisms of judicial activism

A
  1. Unelected and therefore UNACCOUNTABLE
  2. SC can STRIKE DOWN Acts of Congress with limited checks, breaches SoPs
  3. SC can strike down state law, undermining FEDERALISM
  4. The court can OVERRULE itself without the constitution changing, acts politically rather than neutrally
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

List criticisms of judicial restraint

A
  1. If the SC isn’t different from the elected branches, this might allow laws and policies which directly CONTRADICT the constitution to stand
  2. Frequent CYCLES means elected branches don’t necessarily handle CONTROVERSIAL issues
  3. The constitution would be OUTDATED if the SC could’t interpret in a modern way
  4. The power of judicial review could be considered an IMPLIED power
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

List some factors which ensure the independence of the US SC

A

SoPs
Appointment- Senate and Pres.
Life tenure- no threat of removal
Salary- no punishment/ reward via salary
The American Bar Association- not politically motivated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Give 3 strengths of the appointment process

A
  1. Ensures INDEPENDENCE- highly scrutinised
  2. Ensures judicial ABILITY- scrutiny means highly experienced and qualified
  3. Ensures PERSONAL suitability- lack of bias and character flaws- (Sotomayor questioned for racial and gender bias in Senate )
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Give 3 weaknesses of the appointment process

A
  1. Nomination is POLITICISED- based on President’s ideology
  2. The ratification process is POLITICISED- partisan,
  3. INEFFECTIVE- nominees withhold information on their ideology and views on recent constitutional issues (eg Bork (1987) stating that Roe v Wade had little to no legal basis)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Give 4 factors which affect the President’s choice of nominee

A
  1. Judicial ability
  2. Ideology
  3. Social characteristics/ demographics
  4. Political motivation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Name 2 cases which removed existing public policy through judicial review

A

Citizens United v FEC 2010- 1st amendment and elections, money
Shelby County v Holder 2013- Overturned Voting Rights Act 1965, no case under 14th amendment, state’s decide own election laws

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

3 ways in which campaigners try to help the protection of racial rights

A
  1. Demonstrations and civil resistance
  2. Legal methods
  3. Voter registration drives
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Give 3 arguments in support of AA

A
  1. Improve SOCIO-ECONOMIC status of minority and close the gap in income and education
  2. Reduce racist ATTITUDES by helping overcome de factor segregation. Greater interaction between racial groups got overcome prejudice
  3. It WORKS- where AA has ended there has been a decline in racial minority enrolment in top colleges
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Give 3 arguments against AA

A
  1. Its a from of racial DISCRIMINATION- breaks 14th AMENDMENT, illogical
  2. Wrong FOCUS- focuses on jobs and universities rather than early years
  3. DOESN’T WORK- racial inequality still persists
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

List and explain 3 features outlined within the constitution that help the SC protect rights

A
  1. JUDICIAL REVIEW-
    Overturn other institutions and elected bodies
    Based on constitutional sovereignty
    Especially powerful with judicial activism
  2. INTERPRETATION-
    Vague (apply personal views)
    Detailed constitution would undermine their power
  3. INDEPENDENCE-
    Court is protected from external pressure
    Justices make judgements based on constitutional sovereignty and protects judicial review and interpretative powers
    Amendment process means its hard to overturn court decisions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

List and explain 3 limits on the SC that prevent the protection of rights

A
  1. WORDING of the constitution-
    Bound by constitutional sovereignty
  2. LIMITED JURISDICTION-
    Only deal with constitutional issues
    Weaker than other branches, can’t make policy
    Cant deal with annual budget and foreign policy
  3. EXTERNAL PRESSURE-
    Some external influence and restraint eg pressure groups and public opinion
    President’s authority can undermine the court
    Overturned via constitutional amendment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

3 points in favour of originalism

A
  1. Restricts PERSONAL influence
  2. Gives Constitution greater AUTHORITY
  3. Any changes or progress should be done by the DEMOCRATIC process, not by the unelected unaccountable judges
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

3 points in favour of a Living Constitution

A
  1. Keeps RELEVANT and up to date, reflects modern SOCIETY
  2. Originalists are no more objective than Living Constitutionalists, impossible to know exact views of FFs
  3. Deliberately VAGUE by FFs, allowing judicial discretion.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

How can Congress influence the balance of the court?

A

Congress can change the number of justices

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are some other words to describe the ideology of a more liberal judge?

A

Loose constructionist

Living Constitutionalist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What are some other words to describe the ideology of a more conservative justice?

A

Strict constructionist

Originalist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Give an example case of conservative judicial activism

A

Citizens United v FEC

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Give an example case of liberal judicial activism

A

Obergefell v Hodges (struck down laws of 13 states and DOMA, LGBTQ, overruling elected officials)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Give an example of conservative judicial restraint

A

Glossip v Gross (continues lethal injection)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Give and example case of liberal judicial restraint

A

Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt (defence of Roe v Wade)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Give 6 points that suggest the court is imperial

A
  1. Unelected, therefore UNACCOUNTABLE
  2. IMPEACHMENT process too hard
  3. Constitutional AMENDMENT process too difficult
  4. Overturn branches which have a MANDATE
  5. Judges go beyond the Constitution, eg new RIGHTS which aren’t mentioned
  6. More cases (8,000) are brought to the SC than they can hear which means they are SELECTIVE on the issues it wants to rule on
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Give 5 points which suggest the court is not imperial

A
  1. Cannot ENFORCE its rulings
  2. SC cannot rule on any case- REACTIVE
  3. AMENDMENTS overturn court
  4. WORDING of the constitution limits judges from interpreting based purely on personal agenda and ideology
  5. Can be IMPEACHED
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Give 5 points which suggest the SC is judicial (and not politicised)

A
  1. Based on CONSTITUTION and its wording not personal agenda
  2. They have LEGAL EXPERIENCE not political
  3. Cannot ENFORCE, needs directly elected branches to do so
  4. There are large majority/ UNANIMOUS decisions despite ideological differences eg Kelly v US 2020
  5. The court uses legal principles like STARE DECISIS, which helps with LEGITIMACY
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Give some points which suggests the SC is politicised

A
  1. Striking down acts of ELECTED branches and influencing ELECTIONS (eg Bush v Gore and Citizens) is inherently political
  2. APPOINTMENT process
  3. Each justice has their own IDEOLOGY or agenda
  4. AMICUS CURIAE briefs means the court is influenced by pressure groups
  5. Doesn’t always address CONTROVERSIAL issues such as gerrymandering and gun control
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Define judicial activism

A

A justice should use their position to promote desirable social ends by overturning political institutions or court precedent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Define judicial restraint

A

The SC’s role should be minimal, and decisions should be deferred to elected branches (eg Clarence Thomas)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Define stare decisis

A

Judicial principles

‘let the decision stand’- justices should refer to, and where possible, adhere to the previous rulings of the Court

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

What is the power of judicial review?

A

The ability of the SC to review the actions and laws of any other body, and overturn anything deemed unconstitutional

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

What are the main FFs intentions?

A 
Protecting minority rights 
Constitutional sovereignty 
SoPs
Checks and balances
Uphold federalism 
(also democratic principles)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What case established judicial review?

A

Marbury vs Madison 1803

declared an act on Congress unconstitutional

32
Q

Name two cases which influenced public policy on election spending

A

Citizens United v FEC 2010
1st- money is free speech, SuperPACs
McCutcheon v FEC 2014- remove individual cap

33
Q

Name two cases which influenced public policy on healthcare

A

NFIB v Sebelius 2011- Upheld Obamacare

King v Burwell 2015- upheld Obamacare

34
Q

Name a case which influenced public policy on the environment

A

Michigan v EPA 2015 undermined Obama’s environmental policy

35
Q

Significant amendments and the rights protected in them

A 
1- free speech, religion, assembly 
2- Right to bear arms 
4- Unreasonable searches and seizures 
8- cruel and unusual punishment 
10- reserved rights of the states 
14- equal protection 
15- right to vote (race)
19- right to vote (gender)
36
Q

Two SC rulings that modernised rights protection

A

Caetano v Massachusetts 2016- stun guns etc full under bearing arms despite not being invented by the time the constitution was written

Carpenter v US 2018- Phone data counts as a search therefore a warrant is required

37
Q

Name 2 cases that could be considered to undermine federalism

A

14th- Obergefell v Hodges 2015
Same sex marriage legal in all states

10- Gonzales v Raich 2005- gov. Can ban growing of marijuana in states under interstate commerce clause

38
Q

Name a case that could be considered to uphold federalism

A

Shelby County v Holder 2013

Overturned Voting Rights Act 1965 under 14th amendment

39
Q

Name a case that could be considered to undermine rights protection

A

14th- Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores 2014- Obamacare and birth control despite religious beliefs, all women justices dissented

40
Q

Name a case which checked exec. power

A

Hamden v Rumsfeld 2006 5-4 Bush administration could not try terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay

41
Q

Failed nomination that suggests the appointment process is partisan

A

Obama’s nomination of Garland was blocked, allegedly as it was his last year, however, Trump was able to appoint Coney Barrett

42
Q

Justice which upheld mandate

A

Roberts joining lib. side to respect Obama’s mandate on healthcare

43
Q

Give two controversial quotes from Sotomayor

A

‘I hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life’.

‘Judges make policy’

44
Q

Which groups lobbied against Kavanaugh?

A

MeToo

Pro-choice group NARAL

45
Q

Quote from Truman on independence

A

‘Whenever you put a man on the SC, he ceases to be your friend’

46
Q

A case in which justices voted against the person who appointed them

A

Trump v Vance 2020

7-2 majority

47
Q

Name a failed appointment which highlights strengths of the appointment process

A

Bush nominated Harriet Miers in 2005- lack of constitutional experience highlighted

48
Q

Name a pressure group sponsored case that protected racial rights

A

Brown v Board 1954- sponsored by NAACP

49
Q

An example of a group that went through the courts to defend AA

A

2014- legal method

Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action

50
Q

Campaign to encourage ethnic minorities to vote

A

2016- nativevote.org- Native Americans to register to vote

51
Q

Successes in voting rights

A

1965 Voting Rights Act- prevented gov. from introducing processes that discriminate
Minority voter registration therefore increased

52
Q

Lack of success in voting rights

A

Turnout among black and Hispanic voters is lower- illegitimate, and illegitimate representation
Shelby v Holder lead to voter ID laws that disproportionately affect minority voters
Husted v Randolph Institute 2018- SC upheld Ohio’s ‘voter caging’

53
Q

Successes in representation

A 
117th- highest levels, 23% of Congress is not white 
House- 13% black, representative of US 
Senate, 3 black, 6 Hispanic 
SC more diverse also
Kamala Harris and Obama 2008
54
Q

Lack of success in representation

A

Still underrepresented- 60% US white, 77% of Congress

Trump Cabinet least diverse since George Bush Senior

55
Q

Successes in AA

A

Sotomayor said she stated she benefitted from AA programmes

Has increased numbers

56
Q

Lack of success in AA

A

Many states have banned AA- Schuette v Coalition Defend AA 2014 states have the right to use initiatives to end AA
Counter-productive
Informal segregation

57
Q

Successes in immigration

A

Growing proportion of Hispanic voters- greater focus on immigration and issues that affect Hispanic voters
DACA and DAPA- Obama, undocumented immigrants and threat of deportation
Biden made the issue a priority- Jan 2021 introduce US Citizenship Act

58
Q

Lack of success in immigration

A

Obama’s failed DREAM Act
Key aspects of DAPA were suspended in 2016
Trump’s attitude and building a wall

59
Q

Executive on protecting racial rights (5)

A
  1. Obama- AA helps to ensure ‘the diversity of a workforce or student body’
  2. TROOPS deployed to enforce legislation- Einshower SC’s order to desegregate schools
  3. REPRESENTATION- Harris and Obama
  4. DACA 2012, DAPA 2014
  5. APPOINTMENTS to the Civil Rights Commission and SC (Sotomayor’s impact on AA)
60
Q

Executive against the protection of racial rights (5)

A
  1. Trump attempt to reverse DAPA and DACA
  2. Trumps’ cuts to Department’s Office of Civil Rights
  3. T’s failure to condemn Charlottesville white supremacists 2017
  4. Bush’s slow response to Hurricane Katrina (disproportionally affects, accusations of racism)
  5. Most of Obama’s immigration reform struck down
61
Q

Congress protecting racial rights (3)

A
  1. REPRESENTATION
  2. BIPARTISAN SUPPORT- immigration reform under Biden for ‘fair and humane system’, Senate under Obama 2013, renew VRA in 2006
  3. DEMOCRATS- Civil Rights Act 1964 and the Voting Rights Act 1965
62
Q

Congress failure to protect racial rights (3)

A
  1. ILLEGITIMATE- 2020, only 59.6% of black, eligible voters turned out, in comparison to the 61.4%
  2. PARTISAN- Obama couldn’t pass immigration reform after 2014, GOP filibuster of DREAM
  3. FAILED- 2015 survey revealed that 495 out of 500 CEO’s of America’s top companies are white, and black Americans are more like to live in poverty and twice as likely to be unemployed
63
Q

SC protect racial rights (4)

A
  1. PROMOTED equality- Brown v. Board 1954 and Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg 1971
  2. IMMIGRATION- Arizona v. US 2012, Trump can’t suspend DACA
  3. AA- 2016 Fisher v Texas and 2003 Grutter vs Bollinger
  4. AMICUS BRIEFS- NAACP’s on Trump V. Hawaii 2018 and the travel ban
64
Q

SC failure to protect racial rights (5)

A
  1. AA DAMAGES- Thomas, AA is condescending and prevents a truly ‘colour-blind’ society, stating that ‘Any policy that accepts the notion that blacks are inferior is a non-starter with me’
  2. AA undermines 14th AMENDMENT
  3. key sections of DACA struck down in Texas v US 2016
  4. ASIAN AMERICAN groups discriminated against
  5. Bound by WORDING
65
Q

SC para topic- imperial

A
  1. DESERVING of their power (or political not judicial)- appointments- Senate hearings vs Gorsuch, Harriet Miers
    partisanship- Garland, quote Truman, Trump v Vance 2020,
    Legal training and unanimous rulings- Kelly vs US
  2. UNACCOUNTABLE, NO MANDATE-
    can’t allow contradictions to stand, need checks eg Hamden vs Rumsfeld 2006 cannot try terrorist suspects act Guantanamo
    Non-ideological activism, eg Citizens v FEC and SuperPACs- however, affects elections- Bush v Gore 2000
    Strike down- SoPs and Fed., Obergefell v Hodges 2014, but also NFIB v Sebelius
    Does/ doesn’t handle controversy due to unelected, eg abortion eg gun control, however handles abortion, upheld liberal restraint, Whole woman’s health v Hellerstedt
  3. CONSTITUTION’S WORDING- wording allows for or prevents rights protection
    Only handle constitutional issues, limited jurisdiction eg foreign policy, amendments, select from 8000
    Checks- impeachment, amendments, cannot enforce, number of justices eg Dem. increase to 13, FFs made to reflect society
    Overrule itself eg Plessy vs Ferguson and Brown v Board, vague allows for update and rights protection, Carpenter v US 2018
66
Q

SC para on topic- political

A
  1. APPOINTMENT process-
    partisan eg Garland, other external pressure, NARAL, NAACP
    no election cycles, no issues of controversy or trying to impress and win votes,
    legal training- Miers
    Withhold eg Gorsuch, controversial issues vs Sotomayor
  2. Judges affect PUBLIC POLICY-
    public policy, non-ideological- Glossip v Gross, Citizens
    amicus briefs, external eg NAACP
    Mandate- NFIB v Sebelius
    legal training and unanimous, Kelly v US 2020
    limited jurisdiction eg foreign policy, cannot allow contradictions to stand, Hamden v Rumsfeld, Bush v Gore eg Shelby v Holder
    Strike down- eg Obergefell vs Hodges 2014
  3. Personal IDEOLOGY- reactive v selective, 800
    unanimous eg Kelly v US 2020
    Judges make policy, insignificant as court rarely handles controversial issues, originalism doesn’t interfere with the politics, AA eg Fisher v Texas 2016
    Up to date- Carpenter v US
    overrule eg Brown v Board, stare decisis
    Ideology- Burwell v Hobby Lobby 2014, all female justices dissented, religion and Obamacare
67
Q

SC para on topic- independent and neutral

A
  1. APPOINTMENTS- withhold eg Gorsuch,
    partisanship eg Garland,
    vote against person who appointed, Trump v Vance 2020 7-2, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch
    Neutral umpire- Roberts not trying to impress voters, controversial issues
    Hearing- Thomas, Kavanaugh, Sotomayor
    Life tenure and fixed salary- no binding to party
  2. PERSONAL agenda-
    overrule itself eg Brown v Board, but also stare decisis ‘making policy’,
    unanimous decisions therefore judicial eg Kelly v US 2020,
    reactive v selective, 8000 cases, ideological balance of the court- Sotomayor’s affects on AA, and ‘wise Latina woman’
    no mandate- respect for mandated branch eg NFIB v Sebelius
    Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt
  3. Bound by CONSTITUTION- its powers and its wording, amendments and impeachment, external pressure due to democratic and pluralist environment eg NAACP,
    constitutional issues and limited jurisdiction
    updated, Carpenter vs US 2018
    Power of judicial review implied- checks on both the states and SoPs- Gonzales v Raich 2005, Obergefell v Hodges 2014. Hamden v Rumsfeld 2006, Texas vs US
    originalism v activism, cant allow contractions to stand
68
Q

Quote to include in introduction

A

Former justice HUGHES- ‘ We are under a constitution, but the constitution is what the judges say it is’

GLAZER- Imperial SC theory

SOTOMAYOR- The SC is where policy is made

69
Q

Para titles on Imperial

A
  1. Deserving/ appointments
  2. Unaccountable/ public policy without mandate
  3. Bound/ enabled by constitution
70
Q

Para titles on politicised

A
  1. Appointments
  2. Public policy
  3. Ideology/ agenda
71
Q

Para titles of independent

A
  1. Appointments
  2. Ideology/ agenda
  3. Constitution
72
Q

Para on appointments (/deserving) (3)

A
  1. Hearings
  2. Partisan
  3. Legal exp./ unanimous
73
Q

Para on public policy (/accountable) (5)

A
  1. Pres. contradictions
  2. Controversial
  3. Strike down
  4. Mandate
  5. Limited jurisdiction
74
Q

Para on constitution (5)

A
  1. Amendments, enforce, numbers
  2. Overrule
  3. Updated
  4. Limited jurisdiction
  5. Judicial review implied, Gonzales v Raich
75
Q

Para on ideology (5)

A
  1. Reactive v Selective
  2. Unanimous v overrule
  3. Personal agenda eg Hobby Lobby
  4. Mandate (eg EPA v Michigan)
  5. Judicial activism not ideological

Component 3: USA Gov. and politics (6 decks)

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