Download - Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings
![Page 1: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Supreme Court Flashcards: The
RulingsThe first slide features the ruling, the following slide identifies the
case itself.
![Page 2: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Established the principle of judicial review.
• Strengthened the power of the judicial branch by giving the Supreme Court the authority to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional.
![Page 3: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Marbury v Marbury v MadisonMadison
(1803)(1803)
![Page 4: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Findings/Significance• Confirmed the right of Congress to
utilize implied powers to carry out its expressed powers.
• Validated the supremacy of the national government over the states by declaring that states cannot interfere with or tax the legitimate activities of the federal government.
![Page 5: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
McCulloch v McCulloch v MarylandMaryland
(1819)(1819)
![Page 6: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Strengthened the power of the federal government to regulate interstate commerce.
• Established the commerce clause’s role as a key vehicle for the expansion of federal power.
![Page 7: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Gibbons v Gibbons v OgdenOgden
(1824)(1824)
![Page 8: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Struck down state-sponsored prayer in public schools.
• Rules that the Regent’s prayer was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause.
![Page 9: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Engel v VitaleEngel v Vitale
(1962)(1962)
![Page 10: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Findings/Significance• Struck down state funding for
private religious schools.• Ruled that state aid to church-
related school must meet three tests: a) the purpose of the aid must be secular, b) the govt’s action must neither help nor inhibit religion and c) the govt’s action must not foster an “excessive entanglement.
![Page 11: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Lemon v Lemon v KurtzmanKurtzman
(1971)(1971)
![Page 12: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Banned polygamy.• Distinguished between religious
beliefs that are protected by the Free Exercise Clause and religious practices that may be restricted
• Rules that religious practices cannot make an act legal that would be otherwise illegal.
![Page 13: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Reynolds v Reynolds v USUS
(1879)(1879)
![Page 14: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Banned the use of illegal drugs in religious ceremonies.
• Ruled that the government can act when religious practices violate criminal laws.
![Page 15: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Employment Employment Division of Division of
Oregon v SmithOregon v Smith(1990)(1990)
![Page 16: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that free speech could be limited when it presents a “clear and present danger…”
• Established the “clear and present danger” test to define conditions under which public authorities can limit free speech.
![Page 17: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Schenk v USSchenk v US
(1919)(1919)
![Page 18: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Findings/Significance• Ruled that public officials cannot win
a suit for defamation unless the statement is made with “actual malice.”
• Established the “actual malice” standard to promote “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” public debate.
![Page 19: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
New York Times New York Times v Sullivanv Sullivan
(1964)(1964)
![Page 20: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that obscenity is not constitutionally protected free speech.
• Created the “prevailing community standards” rule requiring a consideration of the work as a whole.
![Page 21: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Roth v USRoth v US
(1951)(1951)
![Page 22: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Protected some forms of symbolic speech.
• Ruled that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
![Page 23: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Tinker v Des Tinker v Des MoinesMoines
(1969)(1969)
![Page 24: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that flag burning is a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment.
![Page 25: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Texas v JohnsonTexas v Johnson
(1989)(1989)
![Page 26: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Findings/Significance
•Ruled that the Bill of Rights cannot be applied to the states.
![Page 27: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Barron v Barron v BaltimoreBaltimore
(1833)(1833)
![Page 28: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Established precedent for the doctrine of selective incorporation, thus extending most of the requirements of the Bill of Rights to the states.
![Page 29: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Gitlow v Gitlow v New YorkNew York
(1925)(1925)
![Page 30: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Established the exclusionary rule in federal cases.
• Prohibited evidence obtained illegally from being admitted in court.
![Page 31: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Weeks v USWeeks v US
(1914)(1914)
![Page 32: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Extended the exclusionary rule to the states.
• Illustrated the process of selective incorporation through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
![Page 33: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Mapp v OhioMapp v Ohio
(1961)(1961)
![Page 34: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that the 6th Amendment right-to-counsel provision applies to those accused of major crimes under state laws.
• Illustrated the process of selective incorporation through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
![Page 35: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Gideon v Gideon v WainwrightWainwright
(1963)(1963)
![Page 36: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that the police must inform criminal suspects of their constitutional rights before questioning suspects after arrest.
• Required police to read the Miranda rules to criminal suspects.
![Page 37: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Miranda v Miranda v ArizonaArizona
(1966)(1966)
![Page 38: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that African Americans were not citizens and there fore could not petition the Supreme Court.
• Overturned by the 14th Amendment.
![Page 39: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Dred Scott v Dred Scott v SanfordSanford
(1857)(1857)
![Page 40: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Upheld Jim Crow desegregation by approving “separate but equal” public facilities for African Americans.
![Page 41: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Plessy v Plessy v FergusonFerguson
(1896)(1896)
![Page 42: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that racially segregated school violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
• Reversed the principle of “separate but equal” from Plessey.
![Page 43: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Brown v Board Brown v Board of Education Iof Education I
(1954)(1954)
![Page 44: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ordered the Medical School at UC Davis to admit Bakke.
• Ruled that the medical school’s strict quota system denied Bakke the equal protection guaranteed by the 14th amendment.
• Ruled that race could be used as one factor among others in the competition for available places.
![Page 45: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Regents of the Regents of the UC vs. BakkeUC vs. Bakke
(1978)(1978)
![Page 46: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Upheld the affirmative action policy of the University of Michigan Law School.
• Upheld the Bakke ruling that race could be a consideration in admissions policy but that quotas are illegal.
![Page 47: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Grutter v Grutter v BollingerBollinger
(2003)(2003)
![Page 48: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that a Connecticut law criminalizing the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy.
• Established an important precedent for Roe v Wade.
![Page 49: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Griswold v Griswold v ConnecticutConnecticut
(1965)(1965)
![Page 50: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Findings/Significance
•Ruled that a decision to obtain an abortion is protected by the right to privacy implied by the Bill of Rights.
![Page 51: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Roe v WadeRoe v Wade
(1973)(1973)
![Page 52: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Ruled that the judicial branch of government can rule on matters of legislative apportionment.
• Used the principle of “one person, one vote.”
• Ordered state legislative districts to be as equal as possible.
![Page 53: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Baker v CarrBaker v Carr
(1962)(1962)
![Page 54: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Established the principle of “one man, one vote” in drawing congressional districts.
• Triggered widespread redistricting that gave cities and suburbs greater representation in Congress.
![Page 55: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Wesberry v Wesberry v SandersSanders
(1964)(1964)
![Page 56: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Findings/Significance
• Upheld the constitutionality of the relocation of Japanese Americans as a wartime necessity.
• Viewed by contemporary scholars as a flagrant violation of civil liberties.
![Page 57: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Korematsu v Korematsu v USUS
(1944)(1944)
![Page 58: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Findings/Significance
•Ruled that there is no constitutional guarantee of unqualified executive privilege.
![Page 59: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
US v NixonUS v Nixon
(1974)(1974)
![Page 60: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Findings/Significance• Upheld federal limits on campaign
contributions.• Struck down the portion of the Federal
election Campaign Act limiting the amount of money individuals can contribute to their own campaign.
• Ruled that spending money on one’s own campaign is a form of constitutionally protected speech.
• Complicated congressional efforts to enact significant campaign finance reform.
![Page 61: Supreme Court Flashcards: The Rulings](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568132b9550346895d997481/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Buckley v ValeoBuckley v Valeo
(1975)(1975)