SCOTUS Cases Flashcards
(14 cards)
Board v Board of Education (1954)
Facts
Black students in seven states were denied admittance to certain public schools based on race.
Issue
Does segregation of schools based solely on race violate the 14th?
Holding
Racial segregation of public schools allowed by the “separate but equal” principle of Plessy v Ferguson is unconstitutional.
Reasoning
Racially segregated schools violated the equal protections clause of the 14th Amendment.
McDonald v Chicago (2010)
Facts
Residents of Chicago were invariably denied licenses for handguns, creating an effective ban on handguns.
Issue
Does the 2nd Amendment’s right to bear arms apply to the states through the 14th Amendment?
Holding
The right to bear arms for the purpose of self-defense applies to the states.
Reasoning
The 2nd Amendment establishes an individual right to bear arms for self-defense; through the 14th amendment’s due process clause applies to the states (selective incorporation).
NY Times vs US (1971)
Facts
The Nixon Administration attempted to stop the publication of the Pentagon Papers (prior restraint), a classified study of US activities in Vietnam, by the New York Times and the Washington Post.
Issue
Did the Nixon Administration’s attempt to block publication of classified information violate the First Amendment’s Freedom of the Press?
Holding
The government did not have the right to block publication of the Pentagon Papers.
Reasoning
Because of the First Amendment’s Freedom of the Press, there is a heavy presumption against the constitutional validity of the government’s claims of prior restraint.
Engel v Vitale (1962)
Facts
Public schools in New York began school days by inviting students to recite a nondenominational prayer each morning.
Issue
Does reciting a nondenominational prayer in public schools violate the first amendment’s establishment clause?
Holding
States cannot hold prayers in public schools, even if participation is voluntary and the prayer isn’t tied to a specific religion.
Reasoning
Public school sponsorship of religious activities violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
Tinker v Des Moines (1969)
Facts
Students were suspended from public school for wearing black armbands as a symbol to protest the Vietnam War.
Issue
Does a prohibition against wearing black armbands as a form of political protest in public school violate the student’s freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment?
Holding
Yes. Students have free speech rights at school. To justify suppressing speech, the school must prove that it would substantially interfere with the operation of the school.
Reasoning
The student’s right of political, symbolic speech based on the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause overrode the school administrators concern for potential disorder.
Schenck v US (1919)
Facts
Charles Schenck distributed leaflets opposing the military draft. He was arrested for violating the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and obstruct recruitment.
Issue
Did Schenck’s conviction under the Espionage Act violate the First Amendment Free Speech rights?
Holding
No. The Espionage Act was an appropriate exercise of Congress’ wartime authority. Established the precedent that there may be time, place, and manner restrictions to speech.
Reasoning
Speech creating a “clear and present danger” was not protected by the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause and could be limited.
Wisconsin v Yoder (1972)
Facts
A Wisconsin law mandated school attendance until age 16. Amish families refused for religious reasons to send their children to high school once they finished 8th grade.
Issue
Did Wisconsin’s law mandating attendance violate the Free Exercise Clause by criminalizing the action of parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons?
Holding
Wisconsin may not compel Amish students to attend public school beyond 8th grade.
Reasoning
Individual’s interest in free exercise of religion outweighs the state’s interest in compelling school attendance beyond 8th grade (free exercise clause of the 1st amendment)
Gideon v Wainwright (1963)
Facts
Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with a felony and requested that the state court appoint a lawyer for him. The court denied his request because according to Florida state law, attorneys would only be appointed for a person in a capital case.
Issue
Does the 6th amendment’s right to counsel apply to felony defendants in state court?
Holding
Yes, states must provide attorneys for defendants who can’t afford one.
Reasoning
The 6th amendment’s guarantee to the right of counsel extends procedural due process to defendants in state court through the 14th amendment (selective incorporation).
Marbury v Madison (1803)
Facts:
William Marbury was appointed Justice of the Peace in D.C. by President Adams but didn’t receive his commission. He petitioned the Supreme Court to compel Secretary of State James Madison to deliver it.
Issue:
Can the Supreme Court compel Madison to deliver the commission under the authority granted by the Judiciary Act of 1789?
Holding:
No, the Court cannot compel Madison to deliver the commission.
Reasoning:
The Constitution is the nation’s highest law. If an act of Congress conflicts with it, the act is invalid. The Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutionally expanded the Court’s original jurisdiction. This case establishes the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review.
McCulloch v Maryland (1819)
Facts:
Congress created a national bank. In response, several states, including Maryland, passed laws to tax the Bank of the United States.
Issue:
Does Congress have the constitutional authority to create a national bank, and can a state tax it?
Holding:
Yes, Congress may create a national bank. No, states may not tax it.
Reasoning:
Under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8), Congress has implied powers to carry out its enumerated powers. The Supremacy Clause prevents states from taxing federal institutions, as the national government is supreme when in conflict with state laws.
US v Lopez (1995)
Facts:
A student in Texas brought an unloaded gun to school and was charged with violating the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990.
Issue:
Does Congress have the authority under the Commerce Clause to ban guns in school zones?
Holding:
No, the law is unconstitutional.
Reasoning:
Possession of a gun in a school zone does not substantially affect interstate commerce. The Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the states, and the Commerce Clause does not give Congress unlimited regulatory power.
Citizens United v FEC (2010)
Facts:
A law banned corporations and unions from making political ads within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary. In the 2008 primaries, Citizens United was blocked from airing Hillary: The Movie, a film critical of Hillary Clinton.
Issue:
Can the government limit independent political expenditures by corporations under the First Amendment?
Holding:
No, corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited. However, direct contributions to candidates by corporations remain banned under BCRA.
Reasoning:
The First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause protects political speech, including that of corporations. Limiting independent expenditures restricts free expression. The ruling struck down parts of BCRA and led to the rise of Super PACs.
Baker v Carr (1962)
Facts:
Tennessee residents alleged that the state’s congressional districts had not been redrawn in decades, ignoring population growth and shifts. As a result, some votes counted more than others.
Issue:
Does the federal judiciary have jurisdiction over redistricting cases?
Holding:
Yes, redistricting claims are justiciable and can be heard in federal court.
Reasoning:
The Court ruled that unequal districts can violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. This case established the “one person, one vote” principle, requiring districts to be roughly equal in population to ensure fair representation.
Shaw v Reno (1993)
Facts:
After the Justice Department rejected its first redistricting plan, North Carolina created a bizarrely shaped majority-minority district to increase Black representation in Congress, aiming to comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Issue:
Can race be the predominant factor in creating electoral districts under the Equal Protection Clause?
Holding:
No, race cannot be the sole factor in redistricting. Residents may challenge such districts.
Reasoning:
While the Voting Rights Act aims to prevent racial discrimination, redistricting based solely on race violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Districts must be drawn with a compelling government interest and narrow tailoring.
