Gov Supreme Court cases

cases

Schenck vs US (1919)

Free speech is not absolute, proximity and degree matter. Argued that the draft was slavery during WWI. Established “clear and present danger” test and prohibitions on free speech

Gitlow vs New York (1925)

Selective Incorporation Doctrine - the bill of rights will be applied to the states through the 14th on a case by case basis. During the red scare, publishing in news paper from socialist view

Brandenburg vs Ohio (1969)

Direct Incitement Test - intentional, imminence and likelihood of violence

Snyder vs Phelps (2011)

Westborough Baptist church protesting at funerals of soldiers. Allow free speech, results in counterprotest. Congress checks S.C. with law to keep protests a certain distance

Tinker vs Des Moines (1969)

Substantial Disruption Test. Students do not lose their constitutional rights in school but is narrowed. Arm bands

Morse vs Frederick (2007)

Hits for jesus. School won and narrowed free speech. Clarence Thomas writes concurring and wishes to overrule Tinker

Weeks vs US (1914)

Establishes Exclusionary Rule - evidence obtained illegally is inadmissible. Need a warrant

Mapp vs Ohio (1961)

Incorporated the exclusionary rule

Maryland vs Garrison (1987)

Adds the Honest Mistake Exception, Good Faith, Inevitable Discovery. Officers went into the wrong apartment and found evidence

NJ vs T.L.O (1984)

Need reasonable suspicion in public schools, principle not police can check. Lower standard then the probable cause

Gideon vs Wainwright (1963)

Incorporated Right to council

Miranda vs Arizona (1966)

Rights are read to you, gives access to rights for the police, 5th and 6th amendments

NY Times vs Sullivan (1964)

Slander and libel against public officials. Sullivan test, False, damaging, actual malice

Miller vs California (1973)

L.A.P.S. test for obscenity. Literary, Artistic, Political, Scientific. TPM matters, Time Place, Manner, based on community standards. obscene sculpture

Texas vs Johnson (1989)

allows the burning of the american flag, protected under first amendment

US vs Nixon (1974)

Executive privilege is not absolute. watergate

NY Times vs US (1971)

Upheld prohibition against prior restraint (the illegal suppression of materials prior to publication on the grounds that they will be harmful or libelousn, government censorship). Pentagon papers

Everson vs Board of education (1947)

Incorporated exclusionary rule, wall between church and state - used wrong by black

Engel vs Vitale (1962)

No recitation of prayer in public schools

Employment of Division of Oregon vs Smith (1990)

Narrowed free exercise rights. Native Americans fired for drug use although it was for religious purposes,

Wisconsin vs Yoder (1972)

Broadens free exercise rights. Free exercise vs compulsory education. Children not wanting to attend public school as it goes against religious values

Masterpiece Cake vs Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018)

Discriminating due to religious beliefs. Believed it was compelled speech to design a wedding cake for a gay couple.

D.C. vs Heller (2008)

Upheld individual rights to bear arms, heard amicus from parents of killed. Had been law in D.C against owning handguns. NRA

McDonald vs Chicago (2010)

incorporated 2nd amendment

Plessy vs Ferguson (1896)

separate but equal. Guy on the train who was 1/8 black

Brown vs Board of Education (1) (1954)

Ends segregation in public schools de jure

Brown vs Board of Education (2)

Mandate to end segregation in schools at all possible speed

Beginning of the 1st amendment

“congress shall make no law”

importance of the beginning of the 1st amendment

always had the right, protects from being taken away

why was James Madison fearful of creating a bill of rights

he didn’t want to make a list out of fear of leaving something out, can’t list every single right

which amendment did James Madison insist upon

9th Amendment, just because it is not written doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, enumerated rights

which amendment do activists like

9th

which amendment do restrained like

10th

10th amendment

if its not there states have power

Article 1 Sec 8 Clause 1

congress shall have the power to - enumerated

Art 1 Sec 8 Clause 18

elastic

Is obscenity protected speech

no

prior restraint

government censorship

Blacks interpretation of the wall

between church and state

jeffersons wall

between national and state

key court establishment clause doctrines

benevolent neutrality, state can neither “advance not inhibit” religion, primary purpose of support must be secular(nonreligious)

compelled speech doctrine

free speech protections extend beyond generally keeping the government from suppressing people from saying what they want or compelling to express things they do not want to say

Civil war amendments

13th, 14th,15th

13th amendment

abolish slavery

14th amendment

equality

15th amendment

voting rights

civil rights act (1964)

desegregation in many aspects of life, public accommodations, helps 14th

Voting Rights Act (1965)

Elimination of literacy tests as a requirement to register to vote, allowed federal officials to supervise voter registration, helps along with 24th (poll taxes) for 400,000 blacks to register in 1965, helps 15th

3 participation amendments

15th - slaves, 19th- women, 26th - 18y/o

what reinforced the 14th amendment

civil rights act

what reinforced the 15th amendment

voting rights act

what reinforced the 19th amendment

Title 9

title 9

no discrimination under education program or activity receiving federal financial aid, gets rid of quotas, takes away scholarships for mens sports

what was the main issue in the Students for Fair Admissions v University of NC case

whether race-based affirmative action in college admissions is unconstitutional under the 14th

what was the supreme courts decision in the case of Students for Fair Admissions v University of NC

The university of NCs admissions policy violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th

what was the key factor in the supreme court ruling againsts UNCs admissions policy

the failure to demonstrate a compelling interest in diversity

according to the supreme courts ruling in Students for fair admissions vs UNC what is allowed regarding race in college admissions

universities may consider how race has affected an applicants life but only if is is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability

According to the NY POST article what is the primary argument against race-based diversity initiatives in college admissions

they perpetuate racial divisons and stereotypes

what solution does the author f the NY POST article propose to improve diversity in college admissions

focusing on socioeconomic status rather than race

the author of the NY POST article implies that race-based diversity policies

primarily benefit already privileged groups

how does the author of the NY POSt article view the relationship between class and race in the context of college admissions

class-based disparities should be prioritized over race-based disparities

what unintended consequence of Title 9 does the forbes article highlight regarding coaching jobs

title 9 has led to fewer women coaching womens sports teams

why has title 9 been seen as a challenge for initiatives aimed at increasing womens participation in STEM fields

some gender-specific programs designed to support women in STEM have faced legal challenges under Title 9

UC Davis vs Bakke (1978)

argue equal protection clause of 14th. Racial considerations are ok, quotas are not. strict scrutiny test

strict scrutiny test

is there a compelling government interest for the policy, is the policy narrowly tailored to serve specific powers or looking at individuals, is it the least restrictive (best) method of accomplishing the goal

Grutter vs Bollinger (2003)

grad school. UMich law school policy of using race is acceptable, looking more closely at each individual applicant

Gratz vs Bollinger (2003)

UMich undergrad policy of assigning points for race is unconstitutional, not looking as closely into applicants

Important of Grutter and Gratz

Grutter + Gratz = Bakke

Griswold vs Connecticut (1965)

Established a fundamental right to privacy, found in the penumbra of the bill of rights, after comstock laws from 1800s

Roe vs Wade

national decide abortion, use right to privacy established in Griswold, Doctors determine with patient without regulations for each trimester. 1st - patient and doctor authority, 2nd - increasing state interest, state has rights to make it more rare, 3rd - state authority (after viability).

Beliefs of Pro-Choice

safe, legal, rare - don’t want to be a form of birth control

Webster vs Reproductive Health Services (1989)

No public funding for abortion, narrowed Roe vs Wade

Planned Parenthood vs Casey (1992)

Created undue burden test for restrictions on abortion access, narrowed womens right to choose, later overturned by Dobbs. States can now put their own restrictions

Dobbs vs Jackson (2022)

Overturned both Roe and Casey. 5-4. Back to the states

What else is the 14th amendment called

2nd founding of our country, 2nd bill of rights, took words from declaration of independence and put them into law

Bowers vs Hardwick (1986)

Anti-sodomy laws are constitutional

Lawrence vs Texas (2003)

Precedent from Bowers vs Hardwick overruled, anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional

Obergefell vs Hodges (2015)

equal protection clause and 14th amendment, states are required to marry, other states are required to recognize marriages

8th Amendment

cruel and unusual punishment

Gregg vs GA (1976)

the death penalty is not a violation of the 8th

Atkins vs VA (2002)

Execution of mentally disabled is a violation of the 8th

Roper vs Simmons (2004)

Execution of a minor is a violation of the 8th

1st amendment

freedom of speech, establishment clause, free exercise clause

2nd Amendment

Right to beear arms

3rd Amendment

No quartering soldiers

4th Amendment

Unreasonable search and seizure

5th Amendment

must go a trial, can’t be on trial twice for the same crime, cannot testify against oneself, due process

6th Amendment

Right to attorney

7th Amendment

Trial by Jury

9th Amendment

enumerated rights

10th amendment

powers not given to state/national are given to the people

60s court

Warren court, sympathetic to the accused

80s court

Reinquist court, sympathetic to the victim