Final Exam Flashcards
Shelby County v. Holder (2013)
Landmark ruling defined the 10th Amendment. Shelby County in Alabama brought a suit against the U.S. attorney general, claiming that both section five of the Voting Rights Act, which required districts to seek preapproval, and section four, which determined which districts had to seek preapproval, were unconstitutional. In a 5–4 decision, the court found that both sections violated the Tenth Amendment.
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
In 2015, the Obergefell v. Hodges case had a sweeping effect when the Supreme Court clearly identified a constitutional right to marriage based on the Fourteenth Amendment.
Constitutional Amendments (13, 14, 15, 19, 21, 26)
13- abolished slavery and involuntary servitude
14- prohibits states from denying citizens rights, criminals can’t vote
15- black people can vote
19- women can vote
21- repealed prohibition
26- 18+ for local elections
Preemption
legal doctrine that states federal law preempts state law when the two are in conflict
Ex post facto
a law that criminalizes an act retroactively; prohibited under the Constitution
Bill of attainder
a legislative action declaring someone guilty without a trial; prohibited under the Constitution
Habeas Corpus
a petition that enables someone in custody to petition a judge to determine whether that person’s detention is legal
Federal/Enumerated powers
- Regulate Currency
- Foreign Commerce
- Maintain a post office
- Make treaties with foreign nations
- Laws regulating immigration
Voting Rights Act (1965)
Gave the federal government power to remove literacy tests and other ways to discriminate based on race. Made exercising the right to vote a reality for Black men and women in the South
Standing doctrine
Standing refers to the capacity of a plaintiff to bring suit in court. The plaintiff must have suffered an actual harm by the defendant, and the harm must be redressable
Ripeness doctrine
Ripeness refers to the maturity of the facts of a case into an actual controversy. A case is not ripe if the harm to the plaintiff has not yet occurred
Judicial Review
Given to the courts through Marbury v. Madison, the process through which courts may strike down laws or policies that are unconstitutional
Establishment Clause
provision of the First Amendment that prohibits the government from endorsing a state-sponsored religion; interpreted as preventing government from favoring some religious beliefs over others or religion over non-religion
Free Exercise Clause
the provision of the First Amendment that prohibits the government from regulating religious beliefs and practices
Due Process Clause
provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments that limit government power to deny people “life, liberty, or property” on an unfair basis
Exclusionary Rule
a requirement, from Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio, that evidence obtained as a result of an illegal search or seizure cannot be used to try someone for a crime
Sherbert Test
a standard for deciding whether a law violates the free exercise clause; a law will be struck down unless there is a “compelling governmental interest” at stake and it accomplishes its goal by the “least restrictive means” possible
Bush v. Gore (2000)
Two-part rule: 1st, the manual recount did violate the plaintiff’s right to equal protection. 2nd, 5–4 margin, the court ruled that there was not sufficient time to adjust the recount procedure and conduct a full recount. The effect of this ruling gave the Florida electoral votes, and thus the presidency, to George W. Bush.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
challenged “separate but equal” established by Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896. The unanimous decision determined the existence of racially segregated public schools violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The ruling effectively overturned Plessy v. Ferguson and removed the legal supports for segregated schools nationwide.
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)
the Supreme Court established the Lemon test for deciding whether a law or other government action that might promote a particular religious practice should be allowed to stand.
Roe v. Wade (1973)
A pregnant woman from Texas, “Jane Roe” who desired to terminate her pregnancy appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Constitution provides women the right to terminate an abortion without her life being in danger. The 7–2 decision in Roe v. Wade declared that the right to privacy upheld in the decision in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) included a woman’s right to an abortion. The 2023 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health decision overruled the 1973 decision.
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
dealt with the right of Amish parents to homeschool their children, the court said that for a law to be allowed to limit or burden a religious practice, the government must show there was a very good reason for the law in question and that the law was the only feasible way of achieving that goal. (aka Sherbert Test)
McDonald v. Chicago (2010)
The plaintiffs argued that the Fourteenth Amendment had the effect of applying the Second Amendment to the states, not just to the federal government. In a 5–4 decision, the court agreed with McDonald. It concluded that rights like the right to keep and bear arms are important enough for maintaining liberty that the Fourteenth Amendment rightly applies them to the states.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
The court decided that evidence obtained without a warrant could not be used as evidence in a state criminal trial, giving rise to the broad application of what is known as the exclusionary rule.