Terms : Hide Images
| 6729851029 | Engel v Vitale | First Amendment/Establishment Clause - Government-directed prayer in public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, even if the prayer is denominationally neutral and students may remain silent or be excused from the classroom during its recitation. | 0 | |
| 6729851030 | Lemon v Kurtzman | First Amendment/Establishment Clause - For a law to be considered constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, the law must have a legitimate secular purpose, must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and also must not result in an excessive entanglement of government and religion. | 1 | |
| 6729851031 | Wallace v Jaffree | First Amendment/Establishment Clause - silent prayer in schools case, State endorsement of prayer activities in schools is prohibited by the First Amendment. | 2 | |
| 6729851032 | Lee v Weisman | First Amendment/Establishment Clause - schools may not sponsor clerics to conduct even non-denominational prayer | 3 | |
| 6729851033 | Reynolds v U.S. | First Amendment/Free Exercise Clause - the statute can punish criminal activity without regard to religious belief. The First Amendment protected religious belief, but it did not protect religious practices that were judged to be criminal such as bigamy. Those who practice polygamy could no more be exempt from the law than those who may wish to practice human sacrifice as part of their religious belief. | 4 | |
| 6729851034 | Employment Division v Smith | First Amendment/Free Exercise Clause - determined that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote, even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual. Although states have the power to accommodate otherwise illegal acts done in pursuit of religious beliefs, they are not required to do so. | 5 | |
| 6729851035 | Near v Minnesota | First Amendment/Freedom of the Press - Minnesota laws against press companies perceived as malicious, scandalous, or defamatory ruled unconstitutional. | 6 | |
| 6729851036 | NY Times v. U.S. | First Amendment/Freedom of the Press - New York Times and Washington Post could print the Pentagon Papers without risk of government censorship or punishment | 7 | |
| 6729851037 | Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier | First Amendment/Freedom of the Press - school newspaper articles withheld from publication, court ruled schools can exercise editorial concern over the content of student speech so long as they related to school concerns. | 8 | |
| 6729851038 | Schenck v. U.S. | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/non-protected - The circulars urged "Do not submit to intimidation" but advised only peaceful action such as petitioning to repeal the Conscription Act. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and to obstruct recruitment. During wartime, utterances tolerable in peacetime can be punished. Clear and present danger test. | 9 | |
| 6729851039 | Gitlow v. New York | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/non-protected - the government may suppress or punish speech that directly advocates the unlawful overthrow of the government and it upheld the constitutionality of the state statute at issue, which made it a crime to advocate the duty, need, or appropriateness of overthrowing government by force or violence, selective incorporation of 14th amendment. | 10 | |
| 6729851040 | Brandenburg v. Ohio | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/ non-protected - that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is directed to inciting, and is likely to incite, imminent lawless action. | 11 | |
| 6729851041 | Miller v. California | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/non-protected - redefined its definition of obscenity to that which lacks "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." It is now referred to as the Three-prong standard or the Miller test. | 12 | |
| 6729851042 | Bethel School District v. Fraser | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/non-protected, The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, permits a public school to punish a student for giving a lewd and indecent, even if not obscene, speech at a school assembly | 13 | |
| 6729851043 | Buckley v. Valeo | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/protected - campaign finance - upheld federal limits on campaign spending and identified spending money to influence elections is a form of free speech | 14 | |
| 6729851044 | Tinker v. Des Moines | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/symbolic speech - students' wearing of armbands in support of Vietnam truce did not interrupt school activities, pure speech | 15 | |
| 6729851045 | Texas v. Johnson | First Amendment/Freedom of Speech/symbolic speech - flag burning is protected speech | 16 | |
| 6729851046 | Printz v. U.S. | Second Amendment - background check portion of gun bill allowing federal government to require state officers to participate violates federalism. | 17 | |
| 6729851047 | U.S. v. Lopez | Second Amendment - gun laws about schools not related to interstate commerce and not under federal authority | 18 | |
| 6729851048 | Mapp v. Ohio | Fourth Amendment/Exclusionary Rule - evidence taken in unreasonable searches and seizures may not be used in court. | 19 | |
| 6729851049 | NJ v. TLO | Fourth Amendment/reasonable suspicion, schools have the ability to search students as they must maintain a safe school environment | 20 | |
| 6729851050 | Escobedo v. Illinois | Fifth and Sixth Amendment - right to counsel, right to remain silent | 21 | |
| 6729851051 | Miranda v. Arizona | Fifth and Sixth Amendment - unless the accused is notified of the reason for their arrest, the ability to consult with an attorney, the ability to not self-incriminate their testimony is not permissible in court. | 22 | |
| 6729851052 | Gideon v. Wainwright | Fifth and Sixth Amendment/right to an attorney in all state and federal cases must be provided | 23 | |
| 6729851053 | Korematsu v. U.S. | Fifth and Sixth Amendment - internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII was Constitutional, justified during times of emergency and peril | 24 | |
| 6729851054 | Furman v. Georgia | Eighth Amendment - required the application of the death penalty be consistent and non-discriminatory | 25 | |
| 6729851055 | Gregg v. California | Eighth Amendment - death penalty does not violate cruel and unusual punishment so long as laws are clear and the legal system follows procedure. | 26 | |
| 6729851056 | Griswold v. Connecticut | Ninth Amendment - state ban on use of contraceptives violates the right of marital privacy | 27 | |
| 6729851057 | Roe v. Wade | Ninth & Fourteenth Amendments/privacy Abortion is a private matter | 28 | |
| 6729851058 | Webster v. Reproductive Health Services | Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment - Missouri government institutions did not have to provide or support abortion, narrowed Court's ruling on Roe v. Wade | 29 | |
| 6729851059 | Planned Parenthood v. Casey | Ninth Amendment /privacy no spousal consent required for abortion | 30 | |
| 6729851060 | Bowers v. Hardwick | Ninth Amendment - no Constitutional protection of sexual privacy | 31 | |
| 6729851061 | Lawrence v. Texas | Ninth Amendment/Privacy - sexual activity between members of the same sex not illegal. | 32 | |
| 6729851062 | Plessy v. Ferguson | Fourteenth Amendment/Separate is Equal - ruled that railway cars provided were essentially equal so no violation of equal protection. | 33 | |
| 6729851063 | Brown v. Board of Education | Fourteenth Amendment/Separate not Equal - Integration of Schools - racial segregation violates the equal protection clause | 34 | |
| 6729851064 | Loving v. Virginia | Fourteenth Amendment/mixed racial marriage in a state where it was prohibited - struck down as a violation of equal protection. | 35 | |
| 6729851065 | Regents of California v. Bakke | Fourteenth Amendment/Upheld Affirmative Action - race may be one of several factors in college admission policies. | 36 | |
| 6729851066 | Marbury v. Madison | Establishes the Supreme Court as having the power of Judicial Review/interpret the Constitution | 37 | |
| 6729851067 | McCulloch v. Maryland | implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause - Creation of the bank was implied based upon the enumerated power of Congress to tax. State of Maryland could not tax federal bank due to Supremacy Clause | 38 | |
| 6729851068 | Gibbons v. Ogden | Supreme Court of the United States held that the power to regulate interstate commerce, granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, encompassed the power to regulate navigation | 39 | |
| 6736767971 | chicago vs mcdonald | McDonald v. City of Chicago, case in which on June 28, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5-4) that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms," applies to state and local governments as well as to the federal government. | 40 |
