question

Buckley v. Valeo

answer

a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld federal limits on campaign contributions and ruled that spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech. The court also stated candidates can give unlimited amounts of money to their own campaigns.

question

Engel v Vitale

answer

The 1962 Supreme Court decision holding that state officials violated the First Amendment when they wrote a prayer to be recited by New York's schoolchildren.

question

Hustler Magazine v Falwell

answer

Court held that intentional infliction of emotional distress was permissible First Amendment free speech- so long as such speech was about a public official (figure), and could not reasonably be construed to state actual facts about its subject

question

Miller v California

answer

A 1973 Supreme Court decision that avoided defining obscenity by holding that community standards be used to determine whether material is obscene in terms of appealing to a "prurient interest" and being "patently offensive" and lacking in value.

question

Reno v ACLU

answer

The Supreme Court held that the 1996 Communications Decency Act was unconstitutional, since it was overly broad and vague in its regulation of speech on the internet, and it attempted to regulate indecent speech, which is protected.

question

Roth v United States

answer

a 1957 Supreme Court decision ruling that obscenity is not within the area of constitutionally protected speech or press.

question

United States v Eichman

answer

Declared Flag Protection Act, which made flag-burning illegal, unconstitutional, 1990

question

Texas v Johnson

answer

A 1989 case in which the Supreme Court struck down a law banning the burning of the American flag on the grounds that such action was symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment.

question

Tinker v Des Moines School District

answer

1969 - The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, did not permit a public school to punish a student for wearing a black armband as an anti-war protest, absent any evidence that the rule was necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others.

question

Chaplinsky v New Hampshire

answer

(1942) The Court ruled that the first amendment did not protect "fighting words"

question

Gitlow v United States

answer

1925 court decision holding that freedoms of press and speech are "fundamental personal rights protected by the due process clause of the 14Th amendment from impairment by the states as well as the federal government

question

Lemon v Kurtzman

answer

Law must be clearly secular, not prohibiting or inhibiting religion, and there should be no excessive entanglement

question

New York Times v Sullivan

answer

1964; established guidelines for determining whether public officials and public figures could win damage suits for libel. To do so, individuals must prove that the defamatory statements were made w/ "actual malice" and reckless disregard for the truth

question

Schnek v United States

answer

The result of this trial was the Supreme Court ruling that Congress could limit free speech, particularly during wartime, if such speech presented "a clear and present danger" to national interests

question

Near v Minnesota

answer

the 1931 Supreme Court decision holding that the first amendment protects newspapers from prior restraint.

question

Employment Division v Smith

answer

Determined that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote, even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual. Although states have the power to accommodate otherwise illegal acts done in pursuit of religious beliefs, they are not required to do so. Neutral laws of general applicability do not violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

question

Village of Skokie v National Socialist Party

answer

1978 - Nazi group wanted to mark in neighborhood with high percentage of Jewish residents; village tried to prevent march by passing ordinances on parades that targeted the nazis; Illinois Supreme Court said march could not be forbidden because no one was compelled to view or listen to the march

question

Gideon v Wainwright

answer

a landmark case in United States Supreme Court history. In the case, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state courts are required under the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution to provide counsel in criminal cases for defendants unable to afford their own attorneys.

question

Miranda v Arizona

answer

Supreme Court held that criminal suspects must be informed of their right to consult with an attorney and of their right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police.

question

Mapp v Ohio

answer

Established the exclusionary rule was applicable to the states (evidence seized illegally cannot be used in court)

question

Wolf v Colorado

answer

the Fourteenth Amendment did not impose specific limitations on criminal justice in the states, and that illegally obtained evidence did not necessarily have to be excluded from trials in all cases.

question

Bowers v Hardwick

answer

In this case, a gay man from Georgia charged with committing sodomy in his own home with a consenting adult. The court ruled that the Constitution does not explicitly grant the right for homosexuals to practice their lifestyle and that laws against sodomy were Constitutional.

question

Griswold v Connecticut

answer

married couple wanted to get contraceptives; struck down a Connecticut law prohibiting the sale of contraceptives; established the right of privacy through the 4th and 9th amendment

question

Webster v Health Reproductive Service

answer

The USSC uphold MO law and insists that women have a right to abortion but state should not pay "elective surgery"

question

Casey v Planned Parenthood

answer

Husband permission for abortion is unconstitutional (1992)

question

Roe v Wade

answer

established national abortion guidelines; trimester guidelines; no state interference in 1st; state may regulate to protect health of mother in 2nd; state may regulate to protect health or unborn child in 3rd. inferred from right of privacy established in griswald v. connecticut

question

Adarand v Pena

answer

A 1995 Supreme Court decision holding that federal programs that classify people by race, even for an ostensibly benign purpose such as expanding opportunities for minorities, should be presumed to be unconstitutional.

question

Boy Scouts of America v Dale

answer

First Amendment right of expressive association. BSA is allowed to dismiss gay leaders because it is a private institution

question

Plessy v Ferguson

answer

a 1896 Supreme Court decision which legalized state ordered segregation so long as the facilities for blacks and whites were equal

question

Harris v Forklift Service

answer

Sexual harassment not protected by First Amendment Rights

question

Swann v Charlotte-Mecklingberg

answer

Busing Students to promote intergration is constitutional.

question

Baker v Car

answer

less blatant gerrymandering and redistricting was subject to judicial approval

question

Brown v Board of Education

answer

court found that segregation was a violation of the Equal Protection clause "separate but equal" has no place

question

Grutter v Bollinger

answer

affirmative action case (lost) ; race could be used as a factor in admissions as long as there was no point system and race was not a major factor; upheld Bakke case

question

Heart of Atlanta Motel v United States

answer

using the commerce clause as justification for this federal government ruling, aid that places of public acccommodation cannot pick and choose guests

question

Wisconsin v Yoder

answer

free exercise of religion not violation of compulsory attendance laws; Amish children do not have to go to school until they are 16---they may stop after the 8th grade

question

Katz v United States

answer

Expanded the protection of the Fourth Amendment to include conversations, not just things.

question

Escobedo v Ilinois

answer

Right to Counsel during Interrogations

question

Korematsu v United States

answer

1944 Supreme Court case where the Supreme Court upheld the order providing for the relocation of Japanese Americans. It was not until 1988 that Congress formally apologized and agreed to pay $20,000 to each survivor.

question

Gregg v Georgia

answer

upheld the death penalty was NOT cruel and unusual punishment

question

Barron v Baltimore

answer

the 1833 Supreme Court decision holding that the bill of rights restrained only the national government, not the states and cities.

question

Palko v Connecticut

answer

Said that protection against double jeopardy is not guaranteed in the Fourteenth Amendment.

question

Santa Fe Independant School District v Doe

answer

Student led, student initiated prayer at high school football games violates the Establishment Clause

question

NAACP v Alabama

answer

the supreme court protected the right to assemble peaceably in this 1958 case when it decided the NAACP did not have to reveal its membership list and thus subject its members to harassment.

question

Regents of the University of California v Bakke

answer

Courts held while that affirmative action systems are constitutional, a quota system based on race is unconstitutional.

question

Bush v Gore

answer

this case ruled in favor of Bush by saying that recounting the votes in certain counties of Florida was unconstitutional because of equal protection of the law; Gore's wish to make the process as simple and painless as possible backfired

The Supreme Court Case Chart – Flashcards

Unlock all answers in this set

Haven't found what you were looking for?

Search for samples, answers to your questions and flashcards