AP GOVERNMENT TEST court cases and federal documents

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

• Maryland decided to pass a law that imposed taxes on the bank. James McCulloch, who served as a cashier at the Baltimore branch of the Second Bank, decided not to pay the tax. The state court had ruled that the Bank was unconstitutional

• Congress concluded based on the Necessary & Proper Clause that Congress is not limited by its expressed powers. It was decided that through Congress’ implied powers, they had the ability to create a bank.

• Congress also concluded based on the Supremacy Clause that because the national laws were superior to state laws, the states were not allowed to tax the federal government.

schenck v. the United States (1919)

• Charles Schenck distributed leaflets that stated the draft violated the 13th Amendment - which prohibits involuntary servitude. The leaflet wanted people to disobey the draft. Schenck was charged with violating the Espionage Act of 1917.

• The Supreme Court held that the Espionage Act did not violate the First Amendment and it was an appropriate exercise of Congress’ wartime authority. This was a key limitation on the First Amendment as the free speech clause does not allow for advocacy of unlawful behavior.

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

• African American students had been denied admittance to public schools because of these segregation laws, and many argued that this was in violation of the Constitution.

• The Court held that “separate but equal is inherently unequal,” and therefore racial segregation of public schools is unconstitutional. The segregated schools allowed by the previous Plessy case were declared unconstitutional.

• Judicial Review: The Supreme Court is allowed to reverse previous rulings based on the premise of judicial review.

• stare Decisis: The case established that this principle, which states that current courts should look to previous decisions for interpretation, will not always be upheld.

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

• The New York Board of Regents had authorized that at the beginning of each day, a short but voluntary prayer would be recited. Several organizations filed suit against the Board of Regents, claiming that the prayer violated the Constitution.

• The court held that states could not hold prayers in public school EVEN IF it was voluntary and EVEN IF the prayer did not adhere to a specific religion. Because the act of prayer was considered a religious activity, having it occur in a public school (which is funded by the government) would go against the establishment clause of the first amendment.

• School sponsorship of religious activities = violation of first amendment

Baker v. Carr (1962)

• Baker stated that an old law (1901) that detailed the apportionment for Tennessee’s General Assembly had been ignored, and stated that reapportionment did not take into account the significant change that the state had gone through.

• The chief justice and the Court concluded that because of the Fourteenth Amendment issues (through equal protection) that the case seemed to address, the Supreme Court did have the authority to hear this case.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

• Gideon was charged in Florida state court on a felony - breaking and entering charge. During his trial, Gideon requested that he receive a court-appointed lawyer; however, in accordance with Florida State law, an indigent defendant could only have an attorney be appointed in capital crimes/cases. Gideon then filed a habeas corpus suit, stating that the court’s decision violated his rights to be represented.

• The holding was that the Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel applies to state court defendants via the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court stated that because the right of counsel is fundamental, it should be incorporated into the states.

tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)

• A group of students decided to wear black armbands in order to protest the Vietnam War. Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt decided that they would wear their armbands to school despite warnings from school administration. After wearing the armbands to school, they were sent home. The students decided to sue their school district for violating the freedom of expression.

• The Supreme Court held that students still have free speech rights at school, and in order to justify the suppression of speech, the speech must substantially interfere with school operations this case relates directly to the First Amendment, and the ruling confirmed that students’ right of symbolic speech was more powerful than the potential disorder that it could cause.

New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)

• The Nixon Administration tried to prevent the New York Times from publishing material that belonged to a Defense Department study about US intervention in Vietnam. President Nixon stated that it was necessary to national security to prohibit it before publication, also known as prior restraint.

• The Supreme Court, in this case, bolstered the freedom of the press guaranteed by the First Amendment. In a 6-3 vote, the Court established that there was a “heavy presumption against prior restraint” even for national security purposes. This is a key case to know for freedom of the press

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

• Yoder, as well as other Amish parents, refused to send their children to school after the 8th grade. In accordance with their religion, they did not agree with high school attendance. They were later charged under a Wisconsin law that required students to attend school until age 16.

• The court held that the requirement to send children to school beyond the eighth grade was unconstitutional. It stated that an individual’s interest in the free exercise of religion was more powerful than a federal interest in sending children to school beyond the eighth grade

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

• Several North Carolina residents challenged a proposed, unusually shaped district. They believed that the only purpose of the district was that it would definitely elect African-American representatives.

• The Supreme Court held, in a majority opinion authored by Sandra Day O’Connor, that because the district was shaped in such a clearly odd way, it was enough to prove that there was a very apparent effort to separate voters racially.

• The constitutional issue here was whether racial gerrymandering took place with this district (it was very narrow) and if the district raised an Equal Protection Clause question.

United States v. Lopez (1995)

• Lopez was a senior who took a concealed weapon inside his school. Federal charges were soon imposed because of his violation of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 - individuals could not possess firearms within school zones based on the premise of the Commerce Clause.

• The law was considered unconstitutional since having a gun in the school zone did not substantially affect interstate commerce, which is a clear provision in the commerce clause. This case also reaffirmed the Tenth Amendment, which protects states’ rights. It was clear through this case that the commerce clause did not grant Congress limitless power.

• this case, “(introduced) a new phase of federalism that recognized the importance of state sovereignty and local control.”

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

• Chicago passed a handgun ban law, and several suits were filed against the city challenging the ban after another case (District of Columbia v. Heller). In that case, the Court had held that a DC handgun ban violated the Second Amendment. There, since the law was enacted by the federal government, the Second Amendment was applicable.

• the Court stated that the handgun ban was unconstitutional in a 5-4 decision. Because the right to self-defense was fundamental, the 2nd Amendment was incorporated to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)

• The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 had previously banned corporations from independent political spending and direct contributions to campaigns or political parties. In 2008, Citizens United was not allowed to show an anti-Hillary Clinton movie.

• The holding in this case was that corporations should be considered people and therefore their funding of “independent political expenditures cannot be limited.” This is considered a form of political speech, which is protected by the free speech portion of the First Amendment

• Further Impact: This led to the development of Super PACS and a significant increase in the amount of money contributed to political campaigns.

Roe v. Wade

• Jane Roe) wanted an abortion but could not legally have one in the state of Texas, because of a state law that prohibited abortions except in cases where the mother’s life was in danger. She questioned the legality of this law.

• The Supreme Court held that a woman’s right to an abortion fell within the right of privacy that was clarified in Griswold v. Connecticut, and therefore was protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Laws in 46 states were affected by this ruling. This ruling expanded the definition of privacy.

Declaration of Independence

Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence to explain why the colonies were breaking away from Great Britain. 

He explained that Americans deserved the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (aka their unalienable rights). He said that when a government violated those rights it was imperative for the people to overthrow that government and put a just government in its place

Articles of Confederation

• the 2nd Continental Congress they wrote and ratified the Articles of Confederation to give them a governance structure. It’s important to keep in mind that they were written at a time where the colonies were rebelling against a powerful, tyrannical government.

• Congress could do the following: regulate foreign affairs, war, and the postal service, control Indian affairs, borrow money, determine the value of coin, and issue bills of credit. 

• The flaws became much more evident after the Revolutionary War was over.

  • most important was taxing states. impose taxes and give money to the federal government.

  • It also led to some states having huge amounts of debt and others having thriving economies.

  • Congress also couldn’t draft troops, impose tariffs, or regulate interstate commerce. 

  • Congress really couldn’t do anything about any of that because it took 9 of the 13 states to pass any laws or amendments, so nothing really got done.

federalist 10

• Madison explained that factions (groups of people, specifically political parties) are inherent to human nature. They can be things like class, or occupation, or anything else.

• He worried about them because they could incite violence and political instability.

• Madison argued for a representative government, (aka the House of Representatives) to ensure that the rights of the minority were maintained. Because the alternative, which was a popular government where pretty much every person could vote to make legislative decisions, was more conducive to factionalism

federalist 51

• He worried that one branch would dominate the others, which would obviously lead to tyranny. He didn’t want a government dominated by the majority and wanted to protect minority opinions. A division of power among branches was necessary, and that power would be further divided among state governments.

• He said that the legislative branch would be the true voice of the people, as officeholders would be elected and said that power would be divided internally between two chambers

brutus 1

• argued that the Constitution would turn the “league of friendship” that the 13 states had into a government that gave ultimate authority to the federal government,

• It argued that federal power was bad and that the Constitution gives too much power to the federal government. For example, the Necessary and Proper Clause would allow the federal government to make any laws, and the Supremacy Clause that said that federal law supersedes state law would give states no power to disagree with the federal government.

• Brutus said a representative democracy would only create an elite group of people that lead the country because they would concentrate power. He said that representative democracy wouldn’t work in a large country, and people’s views would be inaccurately represented.

federalist 70

• Alexander Hamilton wrote Federalist 70 to advocate for an “energetic executive.” ‘

• some people were arguing that having a council of 3 executives would be the best

  Alexander Hamilton disagreed. He said that 3 executives would naturally argue and their “bitter dissensions” would cause people to lose respect for the executive branch and weaken its authority in the eyes of the people.

  A single executive would also be more closely scrutinized by the people, and it would be easier to watch one person than a group of people.

federalist 78

A lot of people worried that having a branch composed of people that were not elected and couldn’t be voted out of office was super dangerous. 

Alexander Hamilton talked about the judiciary branch in this Paper to allay their concerns.

He began by explaining that the judiciary branch didn’t have "influence over either the sword or the purse” (which means it couldn’t enforce laws, like the President, or take away funding, like Congress). 

This meant it was kinda just there. The judicial branch would have to rely on Congress and the President to have any real power, and they could just choose to ignore its rulings.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights

The United States Constitution was ratified after Federalists agreed to add a Bill of Rights to prevent the federal government from infringing upon peoples’ rights.

The Constitution established that the federal government would be composed of three branches: Congress (legislative), the President and bureaucracy (executive), and the Courts (judiciary). These three branches would have the ability to check each others’ powers to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful

The Constitution also had amendments added to it. The first 10 are called the Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights guarantees Americans certain rights that cannot be taken away or violated by the federal government.

Letter from Birmingham Jail

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was sent to jail for protesting segregation in Birmingham. That’s where he wrote his “Letter from Birmingham City Jail.”

He explains that direct action (peaceful protest) is necessary to force white people to confront racism and that it is direct action that would open up an opportunity for dialogue. He also mentions that civil disobedience is a patriotic response to laws that are unjust.

King goes on to discuss his disappointment in “white moderates” who claim to oppose racism but also reject any direct action. He says that they are more detrimental to the cause of equality than the KKK because they passively allow injustice to continue. He also criticizes the white leadership of churches for upholding the status quo rather than advocating for equality as it once had.