Supreme Court Required Cases

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 0 people
0.0(0)
full-widthCall with Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/16

flashcard set

Earn XP

Description and Tags

The 14 required AP Government and Politics SCOTUS cases

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced
Call with Kai

No study sessions yet.

17 Terms

1
New cards

When was McCulloch v Maryland decided?

1819

2
New cards

What was

(1) the issue of McCulloch v Maryland,

(2) which clause was involved in the issue?

(1) Can Congress possess implied power under the necessary and proper clause to charter a bank, because it helps regulate currency and collect taxes?

(2) The Necessary and Proper Clause in Article I, section 8.

3
New cards

What was the impact of McCulloch v Maryland? (2 points)

The bank boosted the national economy.

Flexible constitution, it created federal implied powers.

4
New cards

Facts of McCulloch v Maryland

No central banking system. Congress opened a central bank, Maryland did not like the idea that the fed gov wanted to control their income. Maryland set a 15,000 dollar tax. McCulloch sued the federal bank and refused Maryland’s taxes. 

5
New cards

What was the holding of McCulloch v Maryland? (ratio and decision)

A 7-0 decision in favor of McCulloch, Maryland’s tax on the national bank was unconstitutional.

6
New cards

What are the facts of United States v Lopez?

In 1992, a 12th Grade student named Alfonzo Lopez brought a gun to school and was convicted under federal crime of the Gun Free School Zones act of 1990.

7
New cards

Maryland’s (the dessenting opinion) argument in McCulloch v Maryland.

Article One. section 8, (the necessary and proper clause) did not give the federal government power to create a bank.

8
New cards

What was…

(1) the issue of United States v Lopez

(2) which clause was involved in the issue?

Did Congress exceed its authority under the commerce clause in passing the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990?

9
New cards

What was the holding of United States v Lopez?

A 5-4 decision that said that Gun Control was not a commerce clause issue. The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 was declared unconstitutional, because the federall government doesn;t have the power to make that law. This case gave more power to the states, specifically when it came to regulating guns.

10
New cards

The dissenting opinion of United States v Lopez was

The disruption of firearms negatively impacts commerce because it interrupt education. Uneducated people won’t stimulate the economy. Also, in areas with high gun violence, families and businesses won’t want to move there.

11
New cards

What were the facts of Baker v Carr?

  • A case decided in 1962.

  • Rural voters had more power in the Tennessee legislator because of the outdated census.

  • Charles Baker though it was violating the equal protection clause for him and other voters and so Baker sued Secretary of state Joe Carr.

12
New cards

What was…

(1) the issue of Baker v Carr

(2) which clause was involved in the issue?

“Do federal courts have jurisdiction to hear cases about reapportionment and redistricting under the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause?”

13
New cards

What was the holding of Baker v Carr?

  • 6-2 in favor of Baker

  • Tennessee failed to redistrict every 10 years for 60 years.

  • This inaccurate redistricting violated the 14th Amendment, Equal Protection clause.

14
New cards

What was thee dessenting opinion of Baker v Carr?

  • Charles Baker only has the right to go to court if his voting power is diluted.

  • This was a political issue not judicial. (the court doesn’t determine political issues)

15
New cards

What was the impact of Baker v Carr?

  • This case directly challenged Gerrymandering

  • Anyone could change their district apportionment.

  • 1 person, 1 vote

  • Every state was redistricted.

16
New cards

What are the facts of Shaw v Reno?

  • Attorney General Janet Shaw, rejected North Carolina’s plan for 2 majority black districts.

  • Shaw viewed it as racial gerrymandering

17
New cards

What was…

(1) the issue of Shaw v Reno

(2) which clause was involved in the issue?

“Did North Carolina resident’s claim raise a valid constitutional issue under the equal protection clause?”