AP Gov Unit 3

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) justification for race in admissions

The Court said achieving a diverse student body is a “compelling interest,” and race can be used as one factor in an individualized, holistic review (no quotas, no automatic points, and the policy must be narrowly tailored and time

Fourth Amendment reasonableness standard

A search is lawful if it’s reasonable under the circumstances, typically meaning supported by a warrant based on probable cause, or it fits a recognized exception (like consent, exigent circumstances, search incident to arrest, plain view, etc.).

Barron v. Baltimore (1833) limit on Bill of Rights

The Court held the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, not state or local governments, until later incorporation through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Why student speech rights are more limited

Schools can regulate student speech to maintain order and fulfill their educational mission, especially when speech disrupts learning or conflicts with school responsibilities (students are under school supervision).

Double Jeopardy Clause protections

Prevents being tried twice for the same offense after acquittal or conviction, and generally bars multiple punishments for the same offense.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) protection for criticism

The Court created the “actual malice” standard for public officials to win libel suits, protecting open debate about government and reducing fear of being sued for honest mistakes.

Schenck v. United States (1919) limiting speech standard

The Court used the “clear and present danger” idea: speech can be punished when it poses a serious, immediate threat that Congress has the power to prevent.

Time, place, and manner restrictions purpose

Allows government to regulate when, where, and how assemblies happen to maintain safety and order, as long as rules are content

Mapp v. Ohio (1961) exclusionary rule to states

The Court applied the exclusionary rule to state police through the Fourteenth Amendment, meaning illegally obtained evidence generally can’t be used in state courts.

Why restrictions upheld in Dennis v. United States (1951)

The Court upheld limits on Communist organizing by treating advocacy tied to a serious risk of overthrow as punishable, using a balancing approach that emphasized the gravity of the threat.

Lawful stop

and

Free Exercise Clause protection

Protects the right to hold religious beliefs absolutely and, to a degree, to practice religion, with limits when neutral, generally applicable laws regulate conduct for legitimate reasons.

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) issue with Guantanamo tribunals

The Court said the military commissions, as set up, lacked proper authorization and didn’t follow required legal procedures (including standards tied to military justice and Geneva

Miller v. California (1973) obscenity test

Material can be obscene if (1) the average person using community standards finds it appeals to prurient interest, (2) it depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way as defined by law, and (3) it lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Why Supreme Court is final interpreter

Judicial review (linked to Marbury v. Madison, 1803) makes the Court the ultimate authority on what the Constitution means in cases it decides.

Symbolic speech vs traditional speech

Symbolic speech communicates a message through actions or symbols (like armbands, flag burning), not just spoken or written words, and can receive First Amendment protection.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) expansion of counsel

The Court required states to provide an attorney to indigent defendants in serious criminal cases (felonies) under the Sixth Amendment as incorporated through the Fourteenth.

Engel v. Vitale (1962) school prayer struck down

Government

Regents v. Bakke (1978) problem with quotas

Rigid racial quotas that reserve seats based on race violate equal protection, but race may be considered as one factor in admissions to support diversity.

Incorporation doctrine via Fourteenth Amendment

Courts use the Due Process Clause (and sometimes other Fourteenth Amendment principles) to apply most Bill of Rights protections to state governments.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) protections

Requires warnings before custodial interrogation so suspects know their rights and statements are voluntary under the Fifth Amendment.

Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) equal protection violation

The admissions system gave automatic, large point boosts for race, which the Court found not narrowly tailored and too mechanical.

Why commercial speech gets less protection

Ads are more regulable because they’re tied to economic activity; government has more room to prevent deception and protect consumers, though truthful ads still get some protection.

Due process rights for Guantanamo detainees (general)

Key cases recognized the right to challenge detention before a neutral decision

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) right to privacy

The Court found “zones of privacy” in the Constitution (from several amendments) protecting marital privacy and struck down the ban on contraception for married couples.

Why Casey replaced Roe’s trimester framework (1992)

The Court kept the core right before viability but switched to the “undue burden” test, focusing on whether a law places a substantial obstacle in the path of someone seeking a pre

Prior restraint meaning

Government generally can’t block publication in advance; censorship before the fact is heavily disfavored under the First Amendment.

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) armbands protected

Students keep First Amendment rights at school, and silent political expression is protected unless it causes substantial disruption or violates others’ rights.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) Lemon test

Government action must (1) have a secular purpose, (2) have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and (3) avoid excessive government entanglement with religion.

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) individual right to bear arms

The Court held the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm for lawful purposes like self

McDonald v. Chicago (2010) Second Amendment to states

The Court applied the Second Amendment to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment.

What was unconstitutional about the Griswold contraception ban

It criminalized married couples’ use of contraception, intruding into marital privacy in a way the Court said the Constitution protects.

Why offensive/profane speech can be protected

The First Amendment protects unpopular and upsetting speech to prevent government from punishing viewpoints; limits exist for narrow categories (true threats, incitement, certain harassment, etc.).

What counts as an unconstitutional “undue burden”

A law is unconstitutional if it creates a substantial obstacle for a person seeking a pre

Why criticism of government is rarely censored

Core purpose of the First Amendment is protecting political debate and holding leaders accountable; censorship risks silencing opposition and undermining democratic self

How habeas corpus limits wartime power

It lets detainees challenge the legality of detention in court, checking executive power even during conflict (unless properly suspended under strict constitutional conditions).

Establishment Clause restriction

Government can’t establish an official religion or favor religion over nonreligion (or one religion over another), including through sponsorship or coercion.

Dennis v. United States (repeat, why upheld)

The Court treated coordinated advocacy tied to a serious threat as punishable and allowed restriction to prevent a high

Miranda rights police must inform

Right to remain silent, anything said can be used against you, right to an attorney, and if you can’t afford one, one will be provided.

Why government can’t censor newspapers before publication

Prior restraint is almost always unconstitutional because it blocks public discussion before it happens and is easy to abuse.

New York Times v. United States (1971) national security vs press

The Court rejected the federal government’s attempt to stop publication of the Pentagon Papers because it didn’t meet the extremely heavy burden required for prior restraint.

Lawrence v. Texas (2003) privacy reasoning

The Court said adults have a liberty interest under the Due Process Clause to engage in private, consensual intimate conduct without government criminalization.

Constitutional basis for affirmative action that survives strict scrutiny

The program must serve a compelling interest (like educational diversity in admissions) and be narrowly tailored (individualized review, no quotas, serious consideration of race

Why schools can regulate student speech more than adult speech

Schools may restrict speech that would be protected in a park or sidewalk if it disrupts class, targets students in a way that undermines safety, or conflicts with school oversight responsibilities.

Equal Protection Clause and modern civil rights/affirmative action

It’s the main constitutional rule against unjustified government discrimination; courts use levels of scrutiny (especially strict scrutiny for race) to evaluate civil rights and admissions policies.

Why obscenity isn’t protected

The Court has said obscenity falls outside First Amendment protection because it’s seen as lacking serious value and historically subject to regulation.

Limits on school

sponsored religious activities

How the Fourth Amendment regulates searches

Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures; warrants must be based on probable cause and describe what’s searched and seized, with limited exceptions.

Why warrants are usually required

A neutral judge should decide probable cause before intruding on privacy; exceptions exist when getting a warrant is impractical or privacy expectations are reduced.