AP Gov: Foundational Court Cases

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 0 people
call kaiCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/13

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Last updated 9:50 PM on 2/8/26
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced
Call with Kai

No analytics yet

Send a link to your students to track their progress

14 Terms

1
New cards

Marbury v Madison 1803

Constitutional issue: judicial review; facts: marbury was promised a job by an outgoing president. The new secretary of state refused to deliver paperwork. Marbury sued to try to get his job; ruling: ruled that they couldn't force Madison to deliver the job because the law marbury used to sue was unconstitutional. Significance: established judicial review

2
New cards

McCulloch v. Maryland 1819

Constitutional Issue: supremacy clause and necessary and proper clause. Facts: Maryland tried to tax the bank of the U.S. to destroy it, they argued that the constitution didn't say Congress could build a bank. Ruling: Congress can create a bank through implied powers (necessary and proper clause) and state4s cannot tax the federal government (supremacy clause). Significance: Federal law is superior to state law

3
New cards

United States v. Lopez 1995

Constitutional Issue: Commerce Clause. Facts: a student brought a gun to school and was charged with violating the federal gun-free school zones act; Congress argued that gun violence affects commerce. Holding: the law is unconstitutional; carrying a gun is not an economic activity. Significance: check on federal power; limits the scope of the Commerce Clause and protects state power.

4
New cards

Engle v. Vitale 1962

Constitutional Issue: First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Facts: New York schools authorized a voluntary, non-denominational prayer at the start of the school day. Ruling: state sponsored prayer in public schools is unconstitutional even if it is voluntary and non-denominational. Significance: the government cannot promote religious prayers (Wall of Seperation).

5
New cards

Wisconsin v. Yoder 1972

Constitutional Issue: First amendment’s Free Exercise Clause. Facts: Amish families refused to send their children to high school violating a state law requiring school until the age of 16. Holding: Trying to get Amish students to attend High School violates their religious beliefs. Significance: an individual’s right to practice religion outweighs state interests in education after 8th grade.

6
New cards

Tinker v. Des Moines 1969

Constitutional Issue: First amendment’s Free Speech (Symbolic Speech). Facts: students wore black armbands to school to protest Vietnam War and were suspended. Holding: the armbands were symbolic speech and did not disrupt any learning. Significance: protects student speech/symbolic speech in schools unless it causes a substantial disruption.

7
New cards

Schenck v. United States 1919

Constitutional Issue: First amendment’s Free Speech. Facts: Schenck distributed leaflets encouraging men to resist the WWI draft; he was charged with violating the Espionage Act. Ruling: Schenck’s conviction was upheld; speech that created a clear and present danger is not protected. Significance: established that free speech is not absolute.

8
New cards

New York Times v. United States 1971

Constitutional Issue: First amendment Freedom of Press. Facts: Nixon administration tried to the NYT from publishing private Pentagon papers claiming national security. Ruling: government did not meet the burden for prior restraint (censorship before publication). Significance: bolstered freedom of the press; government has a very high bar to stop publication of information.

9
New cards

McDonald v. Chicago 2010

Constitutional Issue: Right to Bear Arms (2nd Amend.) and Due Process (14th Amend.). Facts: Chicago passed a ban on handguns; McDonald sued, arguing the 2nd amendment should apply to states, not just the feds. Ruling: 2nd amendment right of self-defense is funamental and applicable to the states. Significance: incorporated the 2nd amendment to the states by the 14the amendment due process clause.

10
New cards

Gideon v. Wainwright 1963

Constitutional Issue: Right to Counsel (6th amendment) and Due Process (14th amendment). Facts: Gideon was charged with a felony but couldn’t afford a lawyer and when he asked, Florida denied him one; he defended himself, lost, and went to jail. Ruling: 6th amendment is a guarantee of counsel and it is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial. Significance: incorporated the 6th amendment to the states by 14th due process clause; states must provide counsel for defendants who cannot afford them.

11
New cards

Brown v. Board of Education 1954

Constitutional Issue: Equal Protection Clause (14th amendment). Facts: African American students denied admittance to certain public schools based on laws allowing public education segregation. Ruling: separate but equal facilites were unequal which violated the Equal Protection Clause. Significance: overruled Plessy v. Ferguson and mandated desegregation of schools.

12
New cards

Citizens United v. FEC 2010

Constitutional Issue: Free Speech (1st amendment). Facts: conservative group wanted to air a film that was critical of Hillary Clinton shortly before a primary; the FEC blocked it under campaign finance laws. Ruling: political spending by corporations is a form of protected free speech and cannot be limited. Significance: led to the creation of Super PACs and massive increas in soft money in elections.

13
New cards

Baker v. Carr 1962

Constitutional Issue: Equal Protection Clause (14th Amendment). Facts: Tennessee hadn’t redrawn district lines in decades making rural votes count much more than urban votes. Ruling: redistricting is a justiciable issue, not just a political question. Significance: established one person, one vote doctrine; districts must be roughly equal in population.

14
New cards

Shaw v. Reno 1993

Constitutional Issue: Equal Protection Clause (14th amendment). Facts: North Carolina created a bizarrely shaped majority-minority district to increase black representation; white voters sued. Ruling: race cannot be the only or predominant factor in creating districts (NO RACIAL GERRYMANDERING). Significance: strict scrutiny must be applied if race is used in redistricting.