AP Government- Supreme Court Cases – Flashcards

Children being bussed to religious schools *Constitutional because it did not go directly to school, but to children. Did not violate 1st amendment

Children wanted to leave school to attend church *Does not violate 1st amendment. Does not force children into religious classes at school

The Abington case concerns Bible-reading in Pennsylvania public schools. At the beginning of the school day, students who attended public schools in the state of Pennsylvania were required to read at least ten verses from the Bible. After completing these readings, school authorities required all Abington Township students to recite the Lord's Prayer. Students could be excluded from these exercises by a written note from their parents to the school. In a related case -- Murray v. Curlett -- a Baltimore statute required Bible-reading or the recitation of the Lord's Prayer at open exercises in public schools. Murray and his mother, professed atheists -- challenged the prayer requirement. *The Abington case concerns Bible-reading in Pennsylvania public schools. At the beginning of the school day, students who attended public schools in the state of Pennsylvania were required to read at least ten verses from the Bible. After completing these readings, school authorities required all Abington Township students to recite the Lord's Prayer. Students could be excluded from these exercises by a written note from their parents to the school. In a related case -- Murray v. Curlett -- a Baltimore statute required Bible-reading or the recitation of the Lord's Prayer at open exercises in public schools. Murray and his mother, professed atheists -- challenged the prayer requirement.

State prayer in school is not forcible *It violates 1st amendment, establishment clause

Epperson (school teacher) wanted to teach the theory of evolution, illegal in AR *Unconstitutional due to the establishment clause.

Public school teachers wages increased, states tried to force parochial schools to increase teacher salaries *Unconstitutional, could lead to a state religion.

Lee wanted a rabbi to recite a prayer at the grad ceremony *Violated establishment clause

The school administration at Westside High School denied permission to a group of students to form a Christian club with the same privileges and meeting terms as other Westside after-school student clubs. In addition to citing the Establishment Clause, Westside refused the club's formation because it lacked a faculty sponsor. When the school board upheld the administration's denial, Mergens and several other students sued. The students alleged that Westside's refusal violated the Equal Access Act, which requiremes that schools in receipt of federal funds provide "equal access" to student groups seeking to express "religious, political, philosophical, or other content" messages. On appeal from an adverse District Court ruling, the Court of Appeals found in favor of the students. The Supreme Court granted Westside certiorari. * Constitutional: Equal Access Act

A student would deliver a prayer before every home game. Some thought violated establishment clause *unconstitutional

Ohio gives aid to families in need for education. The family may choose whichever school (religious or not) to send their children *It is constitutional. Aid given to families snot directly to schools

Schenk passed out leaflets telling men to ignore the draft *To be protected by free speech must pass "clear and present danger" test. (shouting fire in a theater not protected)

Gitlow, a socialist, was arrested for distributing copies of a "left-wing manifesto" that called for the establishment of socialism through strikes and class action of any form. Gitlow was convicted under a state criminal anarchy law, which punished advocating the overthrow of the government by force. At his trial, Gitlow argued that since there was no resulting action flowing from the manifesto's publication, the statute penalized utterences without propensity to incitement of concrete action. The New York courts had decided that anyone who advocated the doctrine of violent revolution violated the law. *Freedom of speech and press were among "fundamental personal rights" protected by 14th amendment. Basically applied 1st am. to states

Frank Palko had been charged with first-degree murder. He was convicted instead of second-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The state of Connecticut appealed and won a new trial; this time the court found Palko guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced him to death. *State must observe all fundamental liberties

"Fighting Words" that are likely to provoke a hostile response are not protected under the First Amendment

Roth mailed out obscene material *Obscene material not protected by 1st am

Sullivan felt being libeled in NY times *Court cannot rule in favor of an public official unless he proves there was actual malice

3 students were suspended for wearing armbands to protest Vietnam war. They challenges saying infringement of free speech *Although they were within free speech grounds. Actions in schools are limited to the district rules

Nixon tried to censor papers from publishing pentagon papers *"prior restraint" is unconstitutional

Miller sent out sexually explicit material against CA regulations *The jury was told to evaluate the material with contemporary standards

Nazi party wanted to protest and march in a jewish neighborhood. *The Nazi Party may march through a largely Jewish neighborhood

Johnson burned an American flag to protest Reagan. Convicted of desecration of a sacred object, but appealed *Symbolic speech protected by 1st amendment

Tried to ban sexually explicit material from being sent to minors *Unconstitutional because it abridged freedom of speech

In early 2002, a many years-long effort by Senators John McCain and Russell Feingold to reform the way that money is raised for--and spent during--political campaigns culminated in the passage of the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002 (the so-called McCain-Feingold bill). Its key provisions were a) a ban on unrestricted ("soft money") donations made directly to political parties (often by corporations, unions, or well-healed individuals) and on the solicitation of those donations by elected officials; b) limits on the advertising that unions, corporations, and non-profit organizations can engage in up to 60 days prior to an election; and c) restrictions on political parties' use of their funds for advertising on behalf of candidates (in the form of "issue ads" or "coordinated expenditures"). The campaign finance reform bill contained an unusual provision providing for an early federal trial and a direct appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, by-passing the typical federal judicial process. In May a special three-judge panel struck down portions of the Campaign Finance Reform Act's ban on soft-money donations but upheld some of the Act's restrictions on the kind of advertising that parties can engage in. The ruling was stayed until the Supreme Court could hear and decide the resulting appeals. *unconstitutional

An ordinance in Manchester, New Hampshire, required that every parade or procession on public streets had to have a license and organizers had to pay a fee. A group of Jehovah's Witnesses were convicted for having a public parade without obtaining a permit. They had assembled at their church, split up into smaller groups, then marched along sidewalks single file, displaying signs and handing out notices of a later meeting. After their expected arrests, their leader, *Invalid due to 1st amendment

*Court unanimously upheld the convictions of the Jehovah's Witnesses for have a public parade without a license and declared that the ordinance was a reasonable police regulation designed to promote the safe and orderly use of public streets. The Court also ruled that the government has an interest in knowing about parades ahead of time so that it can arrange proper security and policing

A Cincinnati, Ohio, municipal ordinance made it unlawful for "three or more persons to assemble . . . on any of the sidewalks . . . and there conduct themselves in a manner annoying to persons passing by . . . ." Petitioners argued that on its face the law was violative of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. *The First and Fourteenth Amendments do not permit a state to make criminal the exercise of the right to assembly simply because its exercise may be 'annoying' to some people."

Chicago's ordinance says that gang members are not allowed to loiter. Anyone believed to be a gang member and loitering will be ordered to disperse *It violates due process and is vague on its face and arbitrary

Mapp was arrested and her items were searched unlawfully and evidence was found *Any evidence collected without a warrant is dismissible in a trial

Workers from a planned parenthood were charged for giving married people pamphlets on how to prevent conception, then prescribing contraceptives. CT's law stated it unlawful to use drugs to prevent conception *The statute violates the right to marital privacy. And the 14th amendment

Katz charged with telling information on the phone. FBI had been listening in. *Violates right to privacy

Roe tired to get an abortion. Texas law states only allowed if mother's life in danger *Violates 14th amendment (right to privacy)

Police dept searched and seized evidence, but not all of it had a warrant. *It was allowed ad the "good faith rule" was created

PA law states that a women must go through many things before obtaining an abortion, including a married woman must get her husbands consent *All of the provisions were deemed unconstitutional. Although all were reinstated except the husband part

A Nebraska law prohibited any "partial birth abortion" unless that procedure was necessary to save the mother's life. It defined "partial birth abortion" as a procedure in which the doctor "partially delivers vaginally a living unborn child before killing the... child," and defined the latter phrase to mean "intentionally delivering into the vagina a living unborn child, or a substantial portion thereof, for the purpose of performing a procedure that the [abortionist] knows will kill the... child and does kill the... child." Violation of the law is a felony, and it provides for the automatic revocation of a convicted doctor's state license to practice medicine. Leroy Carhart, a Nebraska physician who performs abortions in a clinical setting, brought suit seeking a declaration that the statute violates the U.S. Constitution, claiming the law was unconstitutionally vague and placed an undue burden on himself and female patients seeking abortions. The District Court held the statute unconstitutional. The Court of Appeals affirmed. *14th amendment

Escobedo was questioned nonstop, denied his right to see counsel and not informed of his right to remain silent made a damaging statement *5th, 6th and 14th amendments violated. Any statements claimed before rights given are not allowed used.

Petitioner arrived to court without money and asked for counsel to be given to him, the court refused *The states refusal to appoint counsel violates due process clause

Miranda was interrogated by police non stop without being informed of his rights. He incriminated himself *Any signed statements may not be used unless defendant informed of his rights, protecting his 5th amendment rights

After receiving the description of Quarles, an alleged assailant, a police officer entered a supermarket, spotted him, and ordered him to stop. Quarles stopped and was frisked by the officer. Upon detecting an empty shoulder holster, the officer asked Quarles where his gun was. Quarles responded. The officer then formally arrested Quarles and read him his Miranda rights *

During questioning about a robbery he was connected to, Charles Dickerson made statements to authorities admitting that he was the getaway driver in a series of bank robberies. Dickerson was then placed under arrest. The timing of his statement is disputed. The FBI and local detectives testified that Dickerson was advised of his Miranda rights, established in Miranda v. Arizona, and waived them before he made his statement. Dickerson said he was not read his Miranda warnings until after he gave his statement. After his indictment for bank robbery, Dickerson filed a motion to suppress the statement that he made on the ground that he had not received Miranda warnings before being interrogated. The government argued that even if the Miranda warnings were not read, the statement was voluntary and therefore admissible under 18 USC Section 3501, which provides that "a confession shall be admissible in evidence if it is voluntarily given." The District Court granted Dickerson's motion, finding that he had not been read his Miranda rights or signed a waiver until after he made his statement, but the court did not address section 3501. In reversing, the Court of Appeals acknowledged that Dickerson had not received Miranda warnings, but held that section 3501 was satisfied because his statement was voluntary. The court held that "Congress enacted section 3501 with the express purpose of legislatively overruling Miranda and restoring voluntariness as the test for admitting confessions in federal court." *

Four British and Australian citizens were captured by the American military in Pakistan or Afghanistan during the United States' War on Terror. The four men were transported to the American military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. When their families learned of the arrests, they filed suit in federal district court seeking a writ of habeas corpus that would declare the detention unconstitutional. They claimed that the government's decision to deny the men access to attorneys and to hold them indefinitely without access to a court violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process clause. The government countered that the federal courts had no jurisdiction to hear the case because the prisoners were not American citizens and were being held in territory over which the United States did not have sovereignty (the Guantanamo Bay base was leased from Cuba indefinitely in 1903, and Cuba retains "ultimate sovereignty"). The district court agreed with the government, dismissing the case because it found that it did not have jurisdiction. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed the district court's decision. *

A defendants bail was set to high. *In Stack v. Boyle, the U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on "excessive" bail. The Court finds that a defendant's bail cannot be set higher than an amount that is reasonably likely to ensure the defendant's presence at the trial. In Stack, the Court found bail in the amount of $50,000 to be excessive, given the limited financial resources of the defendants and a lack of evidence that the defendants were likely to flee from the area before trial.

Petitioner charged with murder and robbery. Sentenced to death, but unusual for GA *Thought to be in violation of 8th amendment

Harmelin convicted of possessing large amounts of drugs. Sentenced to life in prison w/o parole. Petitioner felt punishment did not match the crime *Although it was sever it did not violate 8th amendment

Cruzan in a vegetative state. The hospital won't allow her parents to pull the plug. *

Lopez carried a hand gun onto school property. Charged, but then he repealed saying it was out of the court's powers *it exceeded the commerce clause's authority

Requires the state to check backgrounds on a person buying a gun. Several groups in different states petitioned saying it was unconstitutional *Ruled unconstitutional

Charles W. Baker and other Tennessee citizens alleged that a 1901 law designed to apportion the seats for the state's General Assembly was virtually ignored. Baker's suit detailed how Tennessee's reapportionment efforts ignored significant economic growth and population shifts within the state. *Guaranty clause does not prevent courts from having the right to determine whether state legislative appointment violates 14th am.

Plaintiff tried to recover land *5th amendment does not apply to states

Religious schools are allowed tax exemption. Bob Jones wasn't receiving it b/c discrimination *Upheld due to the fact that they were trying to get rid of racial discrimination

KKK leader was convicted for causing an uproar in the streets *It is overturned. Speech that does not call for illegal action is protected. But if action is imminent then illegal

Brown tired to go to a school safely located closer to her house. *Separate but equal facilities no longer allowed

Tired to get minimum wage standards for transit workers *Because of the commerce clause cant impose minimum wage standards on states

Fulton and Livingston wanted right to a waterway *The power to regulate commerce lies with federal gov

Owner of hotel wouldn't let black stay there. *Congress has the right to prohibit racial discrimination in places of public accommodation through commerce clause b/c interstate movement of people is commerce

Rights of the accused case... court held that the defendant had not intelligently waived his right to counsel and since the 6th amendment provides for counsel in all federal criminal trials this amendment was therefore violated and thus the verdict was negated. *A person charged with a crime in a federal court is entitled to counsel by the 6th am,

SF schools did not provide Chinese students proper educational instruction *Denied them a meaningful opportunity to participate, violates civil rights act of 194 and 14th am

Marbury sued Madison for right to sit on bench *Judicial review was esablished

An attempt to incorporate a Bank of the US *US constitution is "supreme law of the land"

Minimum wage and standard hours set *Congress may not exercise its power to regulate commerce so far as to force directly upon the states its decisions regarding the conduct of integral gov functions are to be made

Detroit school still segregated *Continued Brown ruling

NAACP tried to set up an office in AL but was not allowed b/c certain procedures not followed *Violated 14th am. b/c freedom to further advance beliefs in liberty

Tired to censor malicious writing *Court would not allow it

Plessy tried to go into a white train car, was convicted. *Separate but equal facilities constitutional

Felt that because taxes had to be paid for education the poorer families felt they were being discriminated against *

The schools in the district were segregated by houses. Needed to be desegregated *The court has the power to remedy the segregation problem if not taken care of by district

The districts for the house were drawn up incorrectly, not entirely representing the population of a district *The district had to be redrawn and decided that every persons vote counts

The board still practiced segregation after Brown. In order to receive funding made a freedom of choice plan allowing people to choose what school to go to *Banned freedom of choice plan.

Idaho probate gives preference of men over women *Gender discrimination violates equal protection clause

Men not able to buy beer unless 21, women 18. *Gender discrimination can only be justified if it serves "important gov objectives"

Draft for men not women *Congress can draft men w/o women

All male military school, would not allow women *State will not finance if all male

Tried to ban abortions unless completely necessary *Only banned from public hospitals allowed doctors to see if fetuses were viable

Affirmative action plan for hiring employees *It was upheld

Defendant felt he was being reversed discriminated against *A quota ban like Bakke's unconstitutional, but diversity was a legit goal

In 1983, the City Council of Richmond, Virginia adopted regulations that required companies awarded city construction contracts to subcontract 30 percent of their business to minority business enterprises. The J.A. Croson Company, which lost its contract because of the 30 percent set-aside, brought suit against the city. *Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

In 1997, Barbara Grutter, a white resident of Michigan, applied for admission to the University of Michigan Law School. Grutter applied with a 3.8 undergraduate GPA and an LSAT score of 161. She was denied admission. The Law School admits that it uses race as a factor in making admissions decisions because it serves a "compelling interest in achieving diversity among its student body." The District Court concluded that the Law School's stated interest in achieving diversity in the student body was not a compelling one and enjoined its use of race in the admissions process. In reversing, the Court of Appeals held that Justice Powell's opinion in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), constituted a binding precedent establishing diversity as a compelling governmental interest sufficient under strict scrutiny review to justify the use of racial preferences in admissions. The appellate court also rejected the district court's finding that the Law School's "critical mass" was the functional equivalent of a quota. *

*, Free Exercise Clause. govt and state cannot suppress the religious views of groups of people.(1940)

*, 1857 Supreme Court decision that stated that slaves were not citizens; that livig in a free state or territory, even for many years, did not free slaves; and declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitional

14th amendment Government doesn't have the right to search someone's home and seize possessions without a search warrant, 1914

overturned Bowers v. Hardwick when it voided a Texas antisodomy law on the grounds that such laws were unconstitutional intrusions of the right to privacy

Obscenity case. Court ruled that it was appropriate to discipline students for use of obscenity. School Assembly

First Amendment issue. Principle had right to censor school newspaper because it was deemed inappropriate

*, Supreme court case in which it was decided that a student may be searched if there is "reasonable ground" for doing so.