Studied by 31 people
MCCULLOCH V. MARYLAND (1819)
Federalism reflects the dynamic distribution of power between national and state governments.
This case established supremacy of the U.S. Constitution and federal laws over state laws.
FACTS: first national bank made bc Hamilton then it expired and then madison made the 2nd one; controversial bc constitution said nothing; Maryland put tax bc no likey and McCulloch refused to pay
ISSUE: did Congress have the power to est a national bank? YES. can a state tax the fed govt? NO.
NECESSARY AND PROPER CLAUSE = Congress has implied powers to do its enumerated powers
SUPREMACY CLAUSE = fed govt > state govt
!!EXPANSION OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!
UNITED STATES V. LOPEZ (1995)
Federalism reflects the dynamic distribution of power between national and state governments.
Congress may not use the commerce clause to make possession of a gun in a school zone a federal crime.
FACTS: student in TX brought gun to school, charged w/ violating the federal gun-free school zones act of 1990 which banned carrying a gun to school
ISSUE: did the above act unconstitutionally exceed Congress’s authority to legislate under the commerce clause? YES
COMMERCE CLAUSE: Congress love to stretch this by saying Congress can regulate anything that affects interstate commerce like saying that guns at school = crime = the economy
REASONING: possession of a gun in a school zone does not substantially affect interstate commerce and the CC does not grant endless pwr; some power must be reserved to the states
!!EXPANSION OF STATE’S RIGHTS!!
ENGEL V. VITALE (1962)
Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals.
School sponsorship of religious activities violates the establishment clause.
FACTS: public schools in NY encourages students to begin school days with the reciting of a nondenominational prayer
ISSUE: does reciting a nondenominational prayer on public schools violate the 1st Amendment’s establishment clause? YES
HOLDING: even if volunarty and nondemnom = NO
REASONING: violate est clause bc promoted a religion
WISCONSIN V. YODER (1972)
Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals.
Compelling Amish students to attend school past the eighth grade violates the free exercise clause.
FACTS: Wisconson law required school attendance until age 16; amish fams refused for religious reasons to send their kids to school once done w/ 8th grade bc promoted things not amish
ISSUE: did Wisconson’s law mandating school attendance violate the FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE by criminalizing the action of parens who refused to end their children to school for religious reasons? YES
HOLDING: don’t have to go after 8th grade
REASONING: personal interest > states interest
TINKER V. DES MOINES INDEPENDENT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT (1969)
Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals.
Public school students have the right to wear black armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War.
FACTS: vietnam war, Kennedy call for cristmas tree truce, 5 kids plan to wear black armbands to show support for turce, school says no and will be suspended but they wore them anyway
ISSUE: does a prohibition against wearing black armbands as a form of political protest in public school violate the students freedom of speech guaranteed by the 1st AMDNEMENT? YES
HOLDING: student have free speech
REASONING: no interference with discipline or detection at school
IMPACT: EXPAND free speech;
NEW YORK TIMES CO. V. UNITED STATES (1971)
Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals.
This case bolstered the freedom of the press, establishing a “heavy presumption against prior restraint” even in cases involving national security.
FACTS: defense department was making pentagon papers abote Vietnam war abd it was leaked; nixon attempted to stop the publication of them before being published by NYT
ISSUE: did the nixon administrations attempt to block publication of classified info violate the 1st AMENDMENT’S FREEDON OF THE PRESS? YES
HOLDING: ya, govt cant do that. the papers had to cause BAD BAD thingd
REASONING: prior restraint is almost impossible to allow even with national security
IMPACT: victory for civil liberties
SCHENCK V. UNITED STATES (1919)
Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals.
Speech creating a “clear and present danger” is not protected by the First Amendment.
FACTS: Schneck was leader in socialist party and dist leaflets opposing the military draft; he was arrested for violating thee espionage act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and construct recruitment
ISSUE: did schenck’s conviction under the espionage act violate his 1st AMDENDMENT right to free speech? NO
HOLDING: no, wartime authority no it is ok
REASONING: normally protected but not rn bc causing a lot of issue with war, no “clear and present danger” allowed
IMPACT: there are time, manner, place restrictions to free speech
GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT (1963)
Protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties.
This case guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent in a state felony case.
FACTS: gioden broke into poolhall and stole money; he was charged with a felony and requested that the state court gave him a lawyer; court denied him and said only allowed in capital cases so he rep himself and failed; applied to SC
ISSUE: does the 6th amendments right to counsel apply to felony defendants in state courts? YES
HOLDING: states must provide attonerys with SELECTIVE INCORPORATION, laws must be applied fairly in non arbitrary manner
REASONING: DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF 14th AMENDMENT
ROE V. WADE (1973)
Protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties.
This case extended the right of privacy to a woman’s decision to have an abortion.
MCDONALD V. CHICAGO (2010)
Protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties.
The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense is applicable to the states.
FACTS: residents of Chicago were invariably denied alisences for handguns, creating an effective ban on handguns, wanted a handgun or home defense
ISSUE: does the 2nd amendments right to bear arms apply to the states thru selective incorporation thru the 14th AMENDMENT?
HOLDING: it does apply to the states
REASONING: self-defense allowed for individuals
IMPACT: less states rights as they cannot make gun bans; liberty v. order; PRO LIBERTY
BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION (1954)
The Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause as well as other constitutional provisions have often been used to support the advancement of equality.
Race-based school segregation violates the equal protection clause.
FACTS: plessy v ferg overturned; brown fam wanted their kid to go to a white school and said no bc of their race
ISSUE: does the segregation of public schools based solely on race violate the 14th AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTIONS CLAUSE? YES
HOLDING: “seprate is not inherently equal” unconstitutional
REASONING: violate equal prot clause
IMPACT: ordered deseg of public states, shows weakness in SC bc cannot enforce anything
CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION (2010)
The impact of federal policies on campaigning and electoral rules continues to be contested by both sides of the political spectrum.
Political spending by corporations, associations, and labor unions is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment.
FACTS: FEC in charge of campaign finance laws. BCRA banned corporations and unions from independent political spending within 60 days of a general or 30 days of a primary election and no direct contributions from corporations to candidates or parties; during 2008 primaries, citizens united, a conservative NPO was prevented by the FEC from showing its anti Hiliary movie (mad bc now is a bonafide movie company and should be allowed bc not campaigning)
ISSUE: can political speech of corporations, labor unions, and associations be banned? can direct contributions by corporations, labor unions, and associations be banned?
HOLDING: corporations are people and therefore corporate funding of independent political expenditures cannot be limited. upheld BCRAs ban on corporate contributions to candidates = corporations, unions, and associations can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money in the form of independent expenditures = SUPER PACS
REASONING: !at amendment free speech = corporations have free speech
IMPACT: election integrity
BAKER V. CARR (1962
The republican ideal in the U.S. is manifested in the structure and operation of the legislative branch.
This case opened the door to equal protection challenges to redistricting and the development of the “one person, one vote” doctrine by ruling that challenges to redistricting did not raise “political questions” that would keep federal courts from reviewing such challenges.
FACTS: Tennesse residents said that the state congressional redistricting didn’t take into account population shifts and therefore one person did not equal one vote since 1901; way more rep in rural areas bc less people/electoral vote
ISSUE: does the federal judiciary have jurisdiction over questions of redistricting? YES
REASONING: NC nonpolitical; bc VIOLATE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE of 14th Amendment
IMPACT: once person, one vote doctrine
VOTING RIGHTS AND POWER OF THE COURT
SHAW V. RENO (1993)
The republican ideal in the U.S. is manifested in the structure and operation of the legislative branch.
Majority-minority districts, created under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, may be constitutionally challenged by voters if race is the only factor used in creating the district.
FACTS: NC created a weird shaped majority-minorty district for the purpose if increasing black rep in Congress to comply w/ voting rights act of 1965 (fed approval of change in electoral procedures) and attorney general reject bc it needed another district; white voters sued
ISSUE: can state residents challenge in federal court congressional districts that are racially gerrymandered? YES
REASONING: drawing a district based only on race violated the EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE and opposes the “colorblind” ideal of US law
IMPACT: strict scrutiny = govt must prove compelling interest
MARBURY V. MADISON (1803)
The design of the judicial branch protects the Supreme Court’s independence as a branch of government, and the emergence and use of judicial review remains a powerful judicial practice.
This case established the principle of judicial review, empowering the Supreme Court to nullify an act of the legislative or executive branch that violates the Constitution.
FACTS: Marbury appointed as justice of peace by adams but didn’t receive his commission bc adams out of office and was doing midnight appointment and Marbury angry bc he want job so petition SC to complete Madison, secretary of state, to give him his commission but TJ said NO
ISSUE: does Marbury have a right to his commission? YES. does the SC have the authority to order the delivery of the commission? NO.
HOLDING: Marbury entitled but SC cant give bc the relevant portion of the judiciary act of 1789 was UNCONSTITUTIONAL
REASONING: congress cant pass laws that exceed constitution bc SUPREMACY CLAUSE put constitution > legislation
IMPACT: JUDICIAL REVIEW allowing the SC to have more power (Fed. 78)
FEDERALIST NO. 10
large republic is best to control negative effects of factions bc more factions = diluted power
majority facties tyrannies minorityes
AGAINST DEMOCRSY (mob rule), REPUBLICS REPRESENTATIVE votes for people, FEDERAL SIDE, PLURALIST DEMOCRACY
BRUTUS NO. 1
scared of syrannical govt qith necessary and proper and supremacy clause
no like standing army, taxes
SMALL REPUBLICS, too large = no rep
PARTTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY, STAT RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHST
THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
natural rights
social contract
popular soverenight
ARGUE FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES, DEMOCRACY PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY, SOCIAL MOVEMTN
THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION
weak and fail bc based of state soveregnty, only legislative, unicameral, each state 1 votes,
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
THE BILL OF RIGHTS
FEDERALIST NO. 51
chacks and balances, people want paoer, separation of pwer and have power over eachother, protect from violation of othes
we are not angels
need govt bc we are not perfect and must contol people but not take their rights
FEDERALSIM
LIMITITED OGVT, SEP OF PWR, C&B, FEDERALISM, 2 BRANCHS
“LETTER FROM A BIRMINGHAM JAIL” (BY MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.)
calls for constitution to apply to EVERYONE
need prtest and direct citsen actions, civil disobedience
SOCIAL MOVEMTN AND PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRCY
FEDERALIST NO. 70
singles ececutive better
more effective and contrained
decisive, energets, vigot, expedition, FAST action for war and srisis
congress slow for laws
more accountable bc all blame go to pres
FEDERALIST NO. 78
SC
lifetime service to be good and have no influce, weak branch bc independent and only syasy what to do, judicial review, declare laws viod if against constitution
Note 
Flashcard (61)