Supreme Court Cases to Know AP Gov. PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Supreme Court Cases to Know AP Gov. PDF

Description

Supreme Court Cases to Know Baker v. Carr (1962)- (the Republican ideal in the U.S. is manifested in the structure and operation of the legislative branch) Established the right of federal courts to review redistricting issues, which had previously been termed “political questions” outside the Court’s jurisdiction. Paved the way for “one man, one vote.” This is why each U.S. House Congressional district is roughly the same population size. Brown v. Board of Education (1954)- (14th Amendment’s equal protection clause as well as other constitutional provisions have often been used to support the advancement of equality) Overturned separate but equal doctrine (Plessy v. Ferguson) . Ruled that segregation of public schools was unconstitutional, beginning the integration of public schools. Violates equal protection clause. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)- (the impact of federal policies on campaigning and electoral rules continues to be contested by both sides of the political spectrum) Case challenging the FEC’s ruling that the documentary film entitled Hilary produced by a non-profit corporation and funded by for-profit corporations constituted a violation on the ban on corporate contributions to federal campaigns. Ruled that corporate funding of political ads in candidate elections cannot be limited under 1st amendment. Engel v. Vitale (1962)- (provisions of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals) A state authorized students in its public schools to recite a short, voluntary prayer. The Court found that prayer could not be mandated by public schools as it violated the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)- (protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the 14th Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties) The Court ruled that in state trials, those who cannot afford an attorney will have one provided by the state, overturning Betts v. Brady. The question before the court was about Sovereignty immunity. Marbury v. Madison (1803)- (the design of the judicial branch protects the Supreme Court’s

independence as a branch of government, and the emergence and use of judicial review remains a powerful judicial practice) The court established its role as the arbiter of the constitutionality of federal laws, the principle is known as judicial review. Can nullify an act of the legislative or judicial branch that violates the Constitution. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)- (federalism reflects the dynamic distribution of power between national and state governments) The courts ruled that the states cannot tax the federal government, i.e. the Bank of the United States; the phrase "the power to tax is the power to destroy"; federal government is supreme to the states (supremacy clause); confirmed the constitutionality of the Bank of the United States (elastic clause). McDonald v. Chicago (2010)- (protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the 14th Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties) Determined whether the Second Amendment applies to the individual states. The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states. New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)- (provisions of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals) The Court reaffirmed its position of prior restraint (government preventing material from being published), refusing to stop the publication of the Pentagon Papers. The question before the court was about published work, it was tied into the freedom of speech. Case bolstered the freedom of the press, establishing a “heavy presumption against prior restraint” even in cases involving national security. Roe v. Wade (1973)- (protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the 14th Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties) Women have an absolute right to an abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy based on a constitutionally protected right of privacy, the state can impose restrictions in the second and third trimesters. The question before the court was if women got the right to choose to abort their pregnancy or not. Schenck v. United States (1919)- (provisions of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights are continually

being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals) Protesting the draft. Oliver Wendel Holmes wrote in the opinion that such speech was not protected during wartime because it would create a clear and present danger, establishing a standard for measuring what would and would not be protected speech by the 1st Amendment. The question before the Court was the line between the effect of freedom of speech and national draft orders. Shaw v. Reno (1993)- (the Republican ideal in the U.S. is manifested in the structure and operation of the legislative branch) Redistricting and racial gerrymandering. The court ruled that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause. On the other hand, bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Majorityminority districts, created under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, may be constitutionally challenged by voters if race is the only factor used in creating the district. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)- (provisions of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals) The Court ruled that wearing black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War was symbolic speech, protected by the First Amendment. The question before the court was about the 1st Amendment. United States v. Lopez (1995)- (federalism reflects the dynamic distribution of power between national and state governments) Supreme Court held that while Congress had broad lawmaking authority under the Commerce Clause, the power was limited, and did not extend so far from "commerce" as to authorize the regulation of the carrying of handguns, especially when there was no evidence that carrying them affected the economy on a massive scale. Congress may not use the commerce clause to make possession of a gun in a school zone a federal crime. Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)- (provisions of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals) The Supreme Court ruled (7-0) that compulsory school attendance law was unconstitutional when applied to the Amish, because it violated their rights under the First Amendment, which guaranteed the free exercise of religion....