1/22
facts, const. principle, decision, impact
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
|---|
No study sessions yet.
marbury v madison
facts: marbury petitioned for writ of mandamus to confirm his judicial appointment
const. principle: judicial review (article iii)
decision: confirmed judicial review (declare laws as unconstitutional)
impact: judicial branch is co-equal
mcculloch v maryland
facts: mcculloch wanted to tax US bank in maryland
const. principle: supremacy + N&P clause in article i
decision: federal laws > state laws, national bank is constitutional
impact: strengthened implied powers & fed gov
engel v vitale
facts: NYC school wanted to instate voluntary prayer
const. principle: establishment clause (1st)
decision: school-sponsored prayers represent gov involvement
impact: separation of church & state in education
wisconsin v yoder
facts: amish family was sued for pulling their children out of school 2 years early
const. principle: free exercise clause (1st)
decision: individual liberties → compulsory education does not mean insubordination to all other interests (religious exercise)
impact: allowed for religious exemptions from generally applicable laws
tinker v des moines
facts: schools made rule against students who wanted to wear black arm bands in protest of vietnam war
const. principle: freedom of speech (1st)
decision: schools can’t preemptively restrict when no clear disruption is present
impact: established substantial disruption test (on “school operations”)
new york times v united states
facts: nixon invoked prior restraint to prevent release of pentagon papers (exposing US lies on vietnam war)
const. principle: freedom of press (1st)
decision: prior restraint not valid because it wasn’t in interest of “national security”
impact: heavy presumption against prior restraint
schenck v united states
facts: schenk distributed pamphlets discouraging men from enlisting in wwi draft
const. principle: freedom of speech (1st)
decision: unlawful speech bc went against espionage act by actively encouraging avoidance
impact: ‘clear and present’ danger test
gideon v wainright
facts: gideon couldn’t afford a lawyer and florida didn’t provide one
const. principle: right to counsel (6th)
decision: guarantee of counsel applies to state courts
impact: states must provide legal representation for all criminal cases
mcdonald v chicago
facts: chicago’s ban on handguns prevented mcdonald from using one for self defense (lived in dangerous area)
const. principle: 2nd amendment (privileges & immunities)
decision: right to self defense is fundamental and applicable to states
impact: selective incorporation, indiv right to own firearms
brown v board of education
facts: linda brown denied entry to public school in her area, forced to commute further
const. principle: equal protection clause (14th)
decision: separate educational facilities are inherently unequal
impact: state-sanctioned segregation in public education is unconstitutional
baker v carr
facts: tennessee rural districts had more voting power than urban areas
const. principle: equal protection clause (14th) + political question doctrine
decision: legislative reapportionment cases are justiciable
impact: “one person, one vote” principle & caused mass redistricting
shaw v reno
facts: north carolina created “bizarrely shaped” district to increase black representation
const. principle: equal protection (14th)
decision: race can’t be the sole factor
impact: increased difficulty in creating majority-minority districts
united states v lopez
facts: lopez arrested for carrying handgun, was charged under fed law (justified by commerce clause)
const. principle: commerce clause
decision: fed gun law was unconstitutional bc lack of substantial connection to interstate commerce
impact: reaffirmed dual federalism, limited congress’s power
citizens united vs fec
facts: BCRA made it illegal for corporations to engage in political speech near an election
const. principle: 1st amendment (freedom of speech)
decision: limitations put upon corps for political advertisement = gov censorship of indivs
impact: richest have loudest voices, can spend unlimited money (indirectly)
declaration of independence
declared freedom of thirteen american colonies from britain
natural rights
popular sovereignty
social contract
articles of confederation
first written constitution: states are supreme
can’t raise national army
each state should have a standing army
can’t force taxes
no executive/judicial branch
representation in congress is equal among states
13/13 for amendments, 9/13 for laws & war
no national currency
federalist 10
FEDERALIST:
factions cant be removed BUT the constitution’s government can CONTROL them through republic
large diverse population dilutes power of factions → compromise
brutus i
ANTI FEDERALIST:
diversity and size of US makes representation impossible
n&p + supremacy clause will take power away from the states
fed gov requiring taxation means states “can’t” and therefore they won’t have power
fed courts will render state courts obsolete
the US constitution
article i - enumerated powers of legislative branch + n&p clause
article ii - president is highest chain of command in military & final step in lawmaking process
article iii - judicial courts (SCOTUS = original juris. for ambassadors, states but appellate for everything else)
article iv - states must respect other state laws
article v - amendment (2/3rd to ratify, 3/4th to amend)
article vi - supremacy claus
federalist 51
separation of powers / checks and balances
judicial, legislative, executive branches are independent but “check” each other
federalism: state & fed rights
federalist 70
ONE executive president (not multiple)
easier to assign blame, hold accountability
requires decisiveness
federalist 78
judicial branch - judges hold their role in “good behavior”
lifetime appointments → impartiality
frequently changing justices = more incompetent justices
judicial review checks leg branch
letter from a birmingham jail
equal protection clause supported and motivated social movements
injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere
nonviolent direct action creates the necessary crisis for change
justice delayed is justice denied
those who urge caution are worse than staunch opponents
extremists are changemakers