Question 1

Marbury v. Madison

Accepted Answer

1803 - Marbury  (federalist appointee) was not granted his commission; Chief Justice John Marshall ruled he had the right to his commission.

Question 2

Ruling for Marbury v. Madison

Accepted Answer

SC ruled the courts have the power to determine if the actions of the other branches are constitutional (JUDICIAL REVIEW)

Question 3

McCulloch v. Maryland

Accepted Answer

1819 - McCulloch (worker of 2nd bank of US) refused to pay a state tax by Maryland on banks outside the state. Maryland tried to sue 2nd bank of U.S.

Question 4

Ruling for McCulloch v. Maryland

Accepted Answer

Court ruled in favor of McCulloch; federal gov test. that Congress has implied pwrs under Necessary and Proper clause to create a national bank. States can't tax federal gov.

Question 5

Schenck v. United States

Accepted Answer

1919 - Schenck (socialist party) was convicted of mailing leaflets that discouraged men from registering for draft of WWI by arguing that it violated the constitution. He believed his rights of free speech was violated.

Question 6

Ruling for Schenck v. United States

Accepted Answer

Ruled defendants can be convicted for violating the espionage act. Est. "Clear and present danger test" - speech can be restricted if it poses a significant threat to national security.

Question 7

Brown v. Board of Edu.

Accepted Answer

1954 - Brown filed lawsuit against the board of Ed. of Topeka (1951) when his daughter (Linda Brown) was denied from Topeka's all-white elementary school.

Question 8

Ruling for Brown v. Board of Edu.

Accepted Answer

SC ruled racial segregation in public schools is unconstitutional.

Question 9

Baker v. Carr

Accepted Answer

1962 - Tennessee's votes haven't been redrawn in districts for 60 yrs. Their votes didn't count as much as it should've so voters of Tennessee were angry.

Question 10

Ruling for Baker v. Carr

Accepted Answer

SC ruled this violated 14th amendment and est. that federal courts were able to intervene in and decide cases of legislative actions.

Question 11

Engel v. Vitale

Accepted Answer

1962 - NY required a prayer at the start of school days. Parents (led by Steven Engel) sued NY Hyde parks school districts and claimed these prayers were a violation of 1st amendment.

Question 12

Ruling for Engel v. Vitale

Accepted Answer

SC ruled the school's prayers were unconstitutional bc it established religious practice in public schools.

Question 13

Gideon v. Wainright

Accepted Answer

1963 - Gideon Wainright arrested in 1961 and denied a request for a lawyer bc Florida only provided attorneys for capital cases. Gideon argued this violates the 6th amendment after he was sentences to 5 years.

Question 14

Ruling for Gideon v. Wainright

Accepted Answer

Court ruled in favor of Gideon and established 6th amendment right to counsel. The Court guarantees all defendants in criminal cases have the right to court appointed lawyers.

Question 15

Tinker v. Des Moines

Accepted Answer

1969 - students were suspended from school when wearing black armbands to school in order to protest the Vietnam war. Students' parents sued school and argued suspension challenged free speech.

Question 16

Ruling for Tinker v. Des Moines

Accepted Answer

SC ruled in favor of the students; they should be given their const. rights in school. Created the tinker test - allows schools to limit student speech only if it's disruptive and violated the rights of others.

Question 17

New York times v. USA

Accepted Answer

1971 - (Pentagon papers case); US government tried to stop the publication of Pentagon papers (secret study of Vietnam war). The papers were leaked in 1971 by Daniel Ellsberg to NYtimes; revealed US admin misled the public abt war. Nixon admin tried to stop the document publications and claimed it would harm national security.

Question 18

Ruling of New York Times v. USA

Accepted Answer

SC ruled in favor of the press; declared the gov hadn't met the burden of proof needed to justify the restraint. SC said the Nixon administration attempts to stop the publication violated the 1st amendment protection of freedom of the press.

Question 19

Wisconsin v. Yonder

Accepted Answer

1972 - Amish parents refused to send their kids to school past 8th grade. They argued the state law requiring school attendance to age of 16 violates religious beliefs. Wisconsin argued that the kids needed to be provided a certain level of Edu. for the good of society.

Question 20

ruling of Wisconsin v. Yonder

Accepted Answer

SC ruled in favor of Amish - states couldn't force them to send their kids to school. Amish religious beliefs were directly violated by the school law.

Question 21

Shaw v. Reno

Accepted Answer

1993 - 5 North Carolina resident challenged the states' redistricting plan which was unusually shaped district to ensure black majority. (racial redistricting)

Question 22

ruling for shaw v. reno

Accepted Answer

SC ruled district racial design was unconstitutional bc it violated equal protection clause of the 14th amendment bc its main purpose was to segregate by race.

Question 23

United States v. Lopez

Accepted Answer

1995 - Alfonso Lopez Jr. was charged under the federal law for violating 1990 gun-free school zone act when he brought a concealed and unloaded gun to his high school. The gov argued the law was a valid exercise of commerce clause power bc gun violence can 'impact' the economy.

Question 24

ruling or US v. lopez

Accepted Answer

SC ruled the gun laws were unconstitutional bc it exceeds congress' pwr under the commerce clause. They ruled carrying a gun near school wasn't economic activity that affects interstate commerce power; power to regulate this is reserved for the states.

Question 25

Citizens United v, Federal elections commission (FEC)

Accepted Answer

2010 - Nonprofit organization (citizens United) created a film against Hillary Clinton but were unable to publish the film due to the bipartisan campaign reform act (McCain-feingold act) which prohibits corporations and unions from using payment funds for 'electioneering communications' (ads mentioning candidates leading up to the election.

Question 26

Ruling for citizens United v. FEC

Accepted Answer

SC ruled law unconstitutional and the gov can't restrict political spending of corporations and unions. The ban on direct contributions from corps to candidates did not get taken away but the ruling upheld requirements for disclosure and disclaimers on political ads.

Question 27

Mcdonald v. Chicago

Accepted Answer

2010 - Ortis McDonald and other Chicago residents challenged the city's handgun ban and argued it violated the right to defense. It questioned whether the 2nd amendment (originally applied to the federal gov) should be applied to the state and local govs through the 14th amendment.

Question 28

ruling for McDonald v. Chicago

Accepted Answer

SC ruled in favor of McDonald; held that 2nd amendment is a right applicable to the states and extended the right to Bear Arms to all levels of government and struck down on Chicago's handgun ban but left possibilities for gun control regulation open.

GOV SC cases