HomeFoundational Documents Flashcard Front: Federalist No. 10 Back: Argues for a large republic to control factions; pluralism prevents any one group from dominating. Flashcard Front: Brutus No. 1 Back: Anti-Federalist paper arguing against a strong central government; fears loss of liberty and state power. Flashcard Front: Federalist No. 51 Back: Separation of powers and checks and balances are necessary to prevent tyranny. ⸻ Key Supreme Court Cases Flashcard Front: Marbury v. Madison (1803) Back: Established judicial review—SCOTUS can strike down laws as unconstitutional. Flashcard Front: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Back: Affirmed federal supremacy and implied powers (Necessary & Proper Clause). Flashcard Front: United States v. Lopez (1995) Back: Limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause; federalism victory. Flashcard Front: Baker v. Carr (1961) Back: Opened the door to “one person, one vote” redistricting under the Equal Protection Clause. Flashcard Front: Citizens United v. FEC (2010) Back: Political spending by corporations and unions is protected speech under the First Amendment. ⸻ Key Concepts Flashcard Front: Separation of Powers Back: Division of government responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising core functions of another. Flashcard Front: Checks and Balances Back: System allowing each branch to amend or veto acts of another branch to prevent overreach. Flashcard Front: Federalism Back: The division of power between federal and state governments. Flashcard Front: Participatory, Pluralist, and Elite Democracy Back: Models of democracy explaining different roles of citizens and groups in policymaking.

Foundational Documents Flashcard Front: Federalist No. 10 Back: Argues for a large republic to control factions; pluralism prevents any one group from dominating. Flashcard Front: Brutus No. 1 Back: Anti-Federalist paper arguing against a strong central government; fears loss of liberty and state power. Flashcard Front: Federalist No. 51 Back: Separation of powers and checks and balances are necessary to prevent tyranny. ⸻ Key Supreme Court Cases Flashcard Front: Marbury v. Madison (1803) Back: Established judicial review—SCOTUS can strike down laws as unconstitutional. Flashcard Front: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Back: Affirmed federal supremacy and implied powers (Necessary & Proper Clause). Flashcard Front: United States v. Lopez (1995) Back: Limited Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause; federalism victory. Flashcard Front: Baker v. Carr (1961) Back: Opened the door to “one person, one vote” redistricting under the Equal Protection Clause. Flashcard Front: Citizens United v. FEC (2010) Back: Political spending by corporations and unions is protected speech under the First Amendment. ⸻ Key Concepts Flashcard Front: Separation of Powers Back: Division of government responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising core functions of another. Flashcard Front: Checks and Balances Back: System allowing each branch to amend or veto acts of another branch to prevent overreach. Flashcard Front: Federalism Back: The division of power between federal and state governments. Flashcard Front: Participatory, Pluralist, and Elite Democracy Back: Models of democracy explaining different roles of citizens and groups in policymaking.

0.0(0)

Studied by 0 people

Learn

Practice Test

Spaced Repetition

Match

Flashcards

Card Sorting

1/3

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Study Analytics

Name	Mastery	Learn	Test	Matching	Spaced

No study sessions yet.

4 Terms

1

New cards

Federalist No. 10

Argues for a large republic to control factions; pluralism prevents any one group from dominating.

2

New cards

Brutus No. 1

Anti-Federalist paper arguing against a strong central government; fears loss of liberty and state power.

3

New cards

Federalist No. 51

Separation of powers and checks and balances are necessary to prevent tyranny.

4

New cards

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Established judicial review—SCOTUS can strike down laws as unconstitutional.