10 + Amendments + Foundational Documents + Court Cases

federalist no. 10

-danger of factions

-large, strong republic can prevent these dangers

-representatives could create of good balance of pure democracy and control

federalist no. 51

-checks and balances

-separation of powers

federalist no. 70

-executive branch should be led by a single president

-this would allow swift and decisive leadership, especially during times of crisis

-this would increase accountability by allowing the public to target a single person with scrutiny

federalist no. 78

-judiciary branch must be separate from the legislative and executive branches to effectively uphold the Constitution

-judicial review

-lifetime appointments for judges to shield them from political pressures and keep them unbiased

brutus no. 1

-critiques the proposed U.S. Constitution

-strong, centralized federal government would lead to tyranny and the erosion of individual liberties

-urges for a confederation of smaller, more localized governments

letter from a Birmingham jail

-segregation violates the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause

-citizens have a moral responsibility to break unjust laws

-nonviolent direct action is the most useful tool of protest

-waiting almost never leads to action

1st Amendment

Freedom of religion, petition, speech, press, and assembly

2nd Amendment

Right to bear arms (it's just the 2 of us in this world, me and my gun)

4th Amendment

-Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures (police are such squares trying to look for illegal items)

-must have warrant issued by a judge, based on probable cause to search and seize

5th Amendment

• Right to a Grand Jury (determines whether there is sufficient evidence—probable cause—to charge a person)

• Double Jeopardy: Prevents the government from prosecuting an individual for the same crime twice (ex. If John is tried for burglary and found not guilty, the state cannot try him again for that same burglary, even if new evidence arises later)

• Self-Incrimination: Protects individuals from being forced to testify against themselves, often referred to as "taking the Fifth" (ex. remaining silent and demanding an attorney)

• Due Process: Guarantees fair treatment under the law, preventing the government from depriving individuals of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law".

6th Amendment

1. right to a trial by impartial jury for criminal cases

2. right to an attorney

3. right to use witnesses

8th Amendment

cruel and unusual punishment (8 looks like handcuffs)

10th Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States (50 states, 10 is a factor of 50)

14th Amendment

• Citizenship Clause: Grants citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the U.S.

• Privileges or Immunities Clause: Prevents states from reducing the rights of U.S. citizens.

• Due Process Clause: no state shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,". This has been used to apply the Bill of Rights to state governments (selective incorporation)

• Equal Protection Clause: Mandates that states provide equal protection to all persons within their jurisdiction, forming the basis for landmark civil rights cases

15th Amendment

States cannot deny any person the right to vote because of race.

17th Amendment

(seventeenth sounds like senators)

direct election of senators by state citizens (instead of being chosen by state legislatures)

19th amendment

(the 9 looks like the side profile of a big-breasted woman)

guarantees women the right to vote

24th Amendment

(24, poll tax no more) Abolishes poll taxes

26th Amendment

States cannot deny the right to vote based on age (18+) (2+6=8)

civil liberties

• constraints on government power

• fundamental freedoms of the Bill of Rights

• ex. freedom of speech

civil rights

-freedoms from discrimination (equality)

-ex. right to vote

due process clause

prohibits the federal (5th) and state (14th) governments from depriving any person of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

equal protection clause

14th Amendment clause that prohibits states from denying any person within their jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws”

selective incorportation

the Supreme Court, on a case-by-case basis, applies most liberties in the Bill of Rights to the states—not just the federal government—using the 14th amendment’s Due Process Clause ("...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law")

SPARP

1st amendment freedoms of:

• Speech

• Press

• Assembly

• Religion

• Petition

clear and present danger test

-established in Schenck v. United States (1919)

-determines when speech can be restricted under the First Amendment

-It allows the government to limit speech that creates an immediate, serious threat to safety or national security

-ex. inciting illegal acts or hindering war efforts

slander

-spoken false statements that damage a person’s reputation

-not protected under the First Amendment

libel

-written false statements that damage a person’s reputation

-not protected under the First Amendment

malicious intent

publisher must have knowledge of a statement's falsity or have reckless disregard for it’s accuracy to be labelled as libel instead of a simple mistake

reckless disregard for the truth

publishing defamatory information while highly aware of its probable falsity, part of the test for malicious intent

obscenity

sexually explicit material that is unprotected by the First Amendment

zoning laws

-divide land into specific districts (zones)—such as residential, commercial, or industrial—to control land use, density, and building development

-form of police power

-ex. separating factories from residential neighborhoods

symbolic speech

nonverbal, nonwritten communication that conveys a political or social message, protected under the First Amendment

ex. flag burning, armbands, or sit-ins

false advertising

misleading claims in promotional materials to entice consumers into purchasing a product or service, illegal according to FTC

preferred position

certain fundamental constitutional rights—particularly First Amendment freedoms like speech, press, and religion—are entitled to greater protection than others

prior restraint

government censoring speech or publication before it occurs

censorship

government's suppression or regulation of speech, press, or public communication to control information

imminent danger

-stricter version of “clear and present danger” test

-allowing the government to limit free speech only if it is likely to incite immediate lawless action

-it replaced the looser "clear and present danger" test, requiring that potential harm be direct

-ex. inciting a riot

neutrality

foreign policy of impartiality, where the U.S. avoids taking sides

clarity

-regulations on speech must be clear and viewpoint-neutral

-no suppressing speech based on its message

-ex. permits for parades, noise level regulation

least restrictive means

-if a law is content-based (restricts speech based on content), it must be justified by a compelling government interest and be the least restrictive means to achieve it

-ex. an entire TV channel with adult content can’t be struck down because there are parental control options with TVs

free exercise clause

portion of the First Amendment that prohibits the government from interfering with an individual's right to practice their religion

establishment clause

1st amendment prohibits the government from establishing an official religion, favoring one religion over another, or favoring religion over non-religion

wall of separation

strict separation between church and state, based on the First Amendment's Establishment Clause

exclusionary rule

prohibits the government from using evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures in a criminal trial

search and seizure

legal process under the Fourth Amendment where law enforcement examines person/property and collects evidence of a crime, requires a warrant based on probable cause

search warrant

legal document from grand jury authorizing law enforcement to search a suspect, requires probable cause

probable cause

-based on Fourth Amendment

-requires law enforcement to have sufficient evidence to believe a crime has been committed before making an arrest or conducting a search

-higher than suspicion but lower than proof beyond a reasonable doubt

miranda rights

-Right to remain silent

-Anything said can be used in court

-Right to an attorney

-If the suspect cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided

-Rooted in the 5th Amendment (self-incrimination) and 6th Amendment (counsel)

good faith exception

allowing evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to be admitted in court if law enforcement acted with an honest and reasonable belief that their actions were lawful, it limits the exclusionary rule

public safety exception

allows law enforcement to question suspects in custody without administering Miranda warnings if there is an immediate, objective need to protect the public or officers from danger

inevitable discovery

-exception to the Exclusionary Rule that allows illegally obtained evidence to be admissible in court if the prosecution can prove it would have inevitably been discovered through legal means

-ex. a police officer having a warrant to search for drugs and instead finding a dead body and submitting that dead body as legal evidence

military court v. civilian court

-Military courts (courts-martial) are designed to maintain discipline within the armed forces

-civilian courts, part of the traditional judiciary, focus on public safety and individual rights

real id act

-response to 9/11

-prohibits federal agencies, including the TSA, from accepting non-compliant IDs for boarding domestic flights or entering secure federal facilities

-example of an unfunded mandate, forcing states to comply with federal standards for ID issuance (e.g., verifying social security, legal presence), but does not fully fund the implementation, placing the administrative burden on state DMVs

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)

-procedures for physical/electronic surveillance of foreign agents suspected of espionage or terrorism

-It requires intelligence agencies to obtain warrants from a specialized court

jus soli

-"right of the soil"

-birthright citizenship, regardless of their parents' nationality or legal status

jus sanguinis

-"right of blood”

-allows children born abroad to one or more American citizen parents to automatically acquire U.S. citizenship

dual citizenship

recognized as a citizen by two different countries at the same time

naturalization

-foreign-born individual (alien) becomes a U.S. citizen after birth

-Requirements (USCIS):

• Be at least 18 years old.

• Be a Lawful Permanent Resident (Green Card holder) for 3-5+ years.

• Demonstrate good moral character.

• Pass the U.S. Citizenship Civics Test (history and government).

• Demonstrate proficiency in English.

• Take the Oath of Allegiance.

racial profiling

law enforcement agents target individuals based on race rather than specific behavior

police power

-not directly granted to the federal government; they are reserved for the states

-create and enforce laws that protect the public health and safety

-ex. regulating zoning, gambling, traffic safety

hyde amendment

-bans the use of federal funds (such as Medicaid) for abortion services

-exceptions only for rape, incest, or life endangerment

rational basis

-The default standard of judicial review for cases not involving fundamental rights or suspect classifications

-law must be "rationally related" to a "legitimate government interest"

-Very easy for the government to pass

-rational basis (least extreme), intermediate scrutiny (somewhat extreme), strict scrutiny (most extreme)

intermediate scrutiny

-Judicial review that generally applies to cases involving gender/sex discrimination

-law that seems discriminatory must serve an "important government interest" and the means must be "substantially related" to that interest

-gov. can sometimes pass law

-rational basis (least extreme), intermediate scrutiny (somewhat extreme), strict scrutiny (most extreme)

-(ex. In United States v. Virginia (1996), the Supreme Court ruled that a state university’s male-only admission policy violated equal protection because the government failed to provide an "exceedingly persuasive justification" for the exclusion)

strict scrutiny

-judicial review used for cases involving fundamental rights (e.g., voting, free speech) or race, nationality, religion, etc.

-law must be "narrowly tailored" to achieve a "compelling government interest" using the "least restrictive means"

-government rarely wins

-rational basis (least extreme), intermediate scrutiny (somewhat extreme), strict scrutiny (most extreme)

affirmative action

-targeted recruitment, training, and consideration of diversity designed to promote equal opportunity and increase the representation of underrepresented or disadvantaged groups

-ex. colleges going out of their way to admit black students

reverse discrimination

affirmative action policies, intended to boost minority representation, unfairly disadvantage members of majority groups

equality of results

-policies designed to ensure equal economic or social standing among different groups, rather than just equal opportunity

-instead of people starting at the same spot (ex. only having anti-discrimination laws in hiring), they end in the same spot (ex. meeting diversity goals in the student population)

-ex. affirmative action in college admissions, progressive tax rates

equal opportunity

-belief that all individuals should have an equal chance to succeed, free from systemic barriers

-ex. Civil Rights Act

marbury v. madison

-President Adams appointed several Federalist judges at the very end of his term and could only officially deliver some in time

-One of the incomplete commissions was for Marbury, but anti-Federalist Thomas Jefferson didn’t allow his secretary, Madison, to deliver the appointment

-Marbury went to the Supreme Court to demand the commission be sent because he felt he had a right to it

-The court ruled that he had a right to the commission, but that they didn’t have the authority to demand it be sent

-The Supreme Court had the right to send the commission under the Judiciary Act, but the Judiciary Act itself was declared unconstitutional since the constitution says that the Supreme Court only has original jurisdiction over disputes between two or more states, the US and a state, or foreign ministers

-Established judicial review

mcculloch v. maryland

-Maryland tried to tax a federal bank branch in Baltimore, Maryland because they thought federal banks were too powerful over state banks

-The bank teller of the federal bank, McCulloch, refused to pay the tax

-The Supreme Court ruled that the government had a right to establish banks as an implied power (necessary and proper clause) and that states could not tax the banks according to the supremacy clause

schenck v. us

(schenck sounds like snake, mgs, exposing the corrupt government)

-Schenck mailed out papers to 15,000 draftees telling them to resist the WWI draft through petitioning

-He was charged with violating the Espionage Act by obstructing recruitment and causing insubordination in the armed forces

-Schenck argued that he was using his freedom of speech under the 1st amendment

-Ruled that during a time of emergency like wartime, speech that creates immediate danger is not protected under the 1st amendment

brown v. board of education

-Oliver Brown and 12 other parents sued the local board of education because their children were forced to attend a black school farther from home

-It was argued that separate facilities violated the equal protections clause because they were inherently unequal by making black children feel inferior

-It was ruled that segregated public schools were inherently unequal and unconstitutional

baker v. carr

-To ensure proper representation, the Tennessee state constitution required legislative districts to be redrawn every 10 years

-The districts had not been redrawn for over 60 years despite urban areas becoming more populated, causing rural areas to be over-representated

-Mayor Baker of Millington, Tennessee sued the Secretary of State of Tennessee for violating the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment

-Courts can review state legislative apportionments and intervene when the equal protection clause is violated

engel v. vitale

(engel-evangelion)

-A prayer was approved to be said everyday at a New York school

-A group of parents and Engel argued that this violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment

-School argued that the prayer was optional and nondenominational, so it was fine

-It was ruled that public schools can’t have state-composed prayers whether they are voluntary/nondenominational or not

gideon v. wainwright

-Gideon was charged with breaking and entering

-At his state trial, Gideon couldn’t afford an attorney and the judge refused him one

-Gideon lost his case and got a 5-year sentence because he had to represent himself

-In prison, Gideon educated himself further and was accepted to be heard by the Federal Supreme Court

-It was ruled that, under the 6th amendment, the right to counsel also applies to state courts

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District

-Tinker students were suspended for wearing black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War, which was previously banned by their school

-The parents of the students sued the school for violating their freedom of speech

-It was ruled that the armbands weren’t disruptive and were therefore an acceptable form of protest

-Established the “Tinker standard”, allowing school officials to limit student speech only when it was disruptive to the educational environment

NYT co. v. us

-The Pentagon Papers (detailed US involvement in the Vietnam War) were leaked to the NYT and published by them

-NYT was sued because it was argued that the publication violated the Espionage Act and threatened national security

-It was ruled that that the publication didn’t prove substantial danger

-The government has a heavy limit on its ability to censor the press according to the first amendment’s freedom of press

wisconsin v. yoder

-Amish parents in Green County, Wisconsin refused to send their children beyond 8th grade as they felt it violated their religion

-The parents were fined as the state argued that universal education was crucial for preparing citizens for life

-It was ruled that the fine was a violation of the first amendment’s free exercise clause

-Religious freedom outweighs state-mandated education beyond 8th grade

shaw v. reno

-North Carolina was authorized to create another Congressional seat, which caused them to redistrict

-They drew a map with only one majority-black district

-The Department of Justice denied the map and argued it violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 without at least 2 majority-black districts

-North Carolina made a revised map with 2 majority-black districts, but residents sued the state claiming that the redistricting was intended to segregate voters based on race and violated the equal protections clause of the 14th amendment

-Since the district shapes were so odd, they ruled in favor of the white voters and said that race can’t be the predominant factor when redistricting even if it's designed to increase minority representation

us v. lopez

(Lopez sounds Mexican and shady)

-Lopez brought a concealed gun to his high school and was charged with violating the federal law

-Lopez appealed his sentence by arguing that, according to the commerce clause, he could only be regulated by his state since his gun possession wasn’t an interstate commercial activity

-Ruled that the act was unconstitutional and that the gun possession was only a criminal act

-limited Congress's power under the Commerce Clause

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

-Citizens United, a conservative non-profit, produced a documentary about Hilary Clinton who was a Senator and presidential candidate during that time

-They wanted to air and run ads on the film within the 30 days of the 2008 primary election, but were prohibited by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act

-Citizens United argued that this violated the 1st amendment’s freedom of speech

-Ruled that the government can’t restrict independent political expenditures under the 1st amendment’s freedom of speech, encouraging super PACS

mcdonald v. chicago

(old McDonald had a farm)

-McDonald, a 76-year-old resident, was restricted from buying a gun for protection from his neighborhood by the city

-McDonald and others argued that the 14th amendment’s due process clause (can’t deprive individuals of life, liberty, or property) made the 2nd amendment’s right to bear arms applicable to states and local governments

-Ruled in favor of McDonald claiming that the right to bear arms applied to state/local governments

roe v. wade

-roe challenged a state law that banned abortions

-she claimed the state law violated the 14th amendment’s due process clause

-the supreme court ruled that women had a right to abortions under the due process clause

-ruling overturned in 2022