supreme court flashcards: the rulings

Supreme Court Flashcards: The

RulingsThe first slide features the ruling, the following slide identifies the

case itself.

Findings/Significance

• Established the principle of judicial review.

• Strengthened the power of the judicial branch by giving the Supreme Court the authority to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional.

Marbury v Marbury v MadisonMadison

(1803)(1803)

Findings/Significance• Confirmed the right of Congress to

utilize implied powers to carry out its expressed powers.

• Validated the supremacy of the national government over the states by declaring that states cannot interfere with or tax the legitimate activities of the federal government.

McCulloch v McCulloch v MarylandMaryland

(1819)(1819)


• Strengthened the power of the federal government to regulate interstate commerce.

• Established the commerce clause’s role as a key vehicle for the expansion of federal power.

Gibbons v Gibbons v OgdenOgden

(1824)(1824)


• Struck down state-sponsored prayer in public schools.

• Rules that the Regent’s prayer was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause.

Engel v VitaleEngel v Vitale

(1962)(1962)

Findings/Significance• Struck down state funding for

private religious schools.• Ruled that state aid to church-

related school must meet three tests: a) the purpose of the aid must be secular, b) the govt’s action must neither help nor inhibit religion and c) the govt’s action must not foster an “excessive entanglement.

Lemon v Lemon v KurtzmanKurtzman

(1971)(1971)


• Banned polygamy.• Distinguished between religious

beliefs that are protected by the Free Exercise Clause and religious practices that may be restricted

• Rules that religious practices cannot make an act legal that would be otherwise illegal.

Reynolds v Reynolds v USUS

(1879)(1879)


• Banned the use of illegal drugs in religious ceremonies.

• Ruled that the government can act when religious practices violate criminal laws.

Employment Employment Division of Division of

Oregon v SmithOregon v Smith(1990)(1990)


• Ruled that free speech could be limited when it presents a “clear and present danger…”

• Established the “clear and present danger” test to define conditions under which public authorities can limit free speech.

Schenk v USSchenk v US

(1919)(1919)

Findings/Significance• Ruled that public officials cannot win

a suit for defamation unless the statement is made with “actual malice.”

• Established the “actual malice” standard to promote “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” public debate.

New York Times New York Times v Sullivanv Sullivan

(1964)(1964)


• Ruled that obscenity is not constitutionally protected free speech.

• Created the “prevailing community standards” rule requiring a consideration of the work as a whole.

Roth v USRoth v US

(1951)(1951)


• Protected some forms of symbolic speech.

• Ruled that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

Tinker v Des Tinker v Des MoinesMoines

(1969)(1969)


• Ruled that flag burning is a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment.

Texas v JohnsonTexas v Johnson

(1989)(1989)


•Ruled that the Bill of Rights cannot be applied to the states.

Barron v Barron v BaltimoreBaltimore

(1833)(1833)


• Established precedent for the doctrine of selective incorporation, thus extending most of the requirements of the Bill of Rights to the states.

Gitlow v Gitlow v New YorkNew York

(1925)(1925)


• Established the exclusionary rule in federal cases.

• Prohibited evidence obtained illegally from being admitted in court.

Weeks v USWeeks v US

(1914)(1914)


• Extended the exclusionary rule to the states.

• Illustrated the process of selective incorporation through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Mapp v OhioMapp v Ohio

(1961)(1961)


• Ruled that the 6th Amendment right-to-counsel provision applies to those accused of major crimes under state laws.

• Illustrated the process of selective incorporation through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Gideon v Gideon v WainwrightWainwright

(1963)(1963)


• Ruled that the police must inform criminal suspects of their constitutional rights before questioning suspects after arrest.

• Required police to read the Miranda rules to criminal suspects.

Miranda v Miranda v ArizonaArizona

(1966)(1966)


• Ruled that African Americans were not citizens and there fore could not petition the Supreme Court.

• Overturned by the 14th Amendment.

Dred Scott v Dred Scott v SanfordSanford

(1857)(1857)


• Upheld Jim Crow desegregation by approving “separate but equal” public facilities for African Americans.

Plessy v Plessy v FergusonFerguson

(1896)(1896)


• Ruled that racially segregated school violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

• Reversed the principle of “separate but equal” from Plessey.

Brown v Board Brown v Board of Education Iof Education I

(1954)(1954)


• Ordered the Medical School at UC Davis to admit Bakke.

• Ruled that the medical school’s strict quota system denied Bakke the equal protection guaranteed by the 14th amendment.

• Ruled that race could be used as one factor among others in the competition for available places.

Regents of the Regents of the UC vs. BakkeUC vs. Bakke

(1978)(1978)


• Upheld the affirmative action policy of the University of Michigan Law School.

• Upheld the Bakke ruling that race could be a consideration in admissions policy but that quotas are illegal.

Grutter v Grutter v BollingerBollinger

(2003)(2003)


• Ruled that a Connecticut law criminalizing the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy.

• Established an important precedent for Roe v Wade.

Griswold v Griswold v ConnecticutConnecticut

(1965)(1965)


•Ruled that a decision to obtain an abortion is protected by the right to privacy implied by the Bill of Rights.

Roe v WadeRoe v Wade

(1973)(1973)


• Ruled that the judicial branch of government can rule on matters of legislative apportionment.

• Used the principle of “one person, one vote.”

• Ordered state legislative districts to be as equal as possible.

Baker v CarrBaker v Carr

(1962)(1962)


• Established the principle of “one man, one vote” in drawing congressional districts.

• Triggered widespread redistricting that gave cities and suburbs greater representation in Congress.

Wesberry v Wesberry v SandersSanders

(1964)(1964)


• Upheld the constitutionality of the relocation of Japanese Americans as a wartime necessity.

• Viewed by contemporary scholars as a flagrant violation of civil liberties.

Korematsu v Korematsu v USUS

(1944)(1944)


•Ruled that there is no constitutional guarantee of unqualified executive privilege.

US v NixonUS v Nixon

(1974)(1974)

Findings/Significance• Upheld federal limits on campaign

contributions.• Struck down the portion of the Federal

election Campaign Act limiting the amount of money individuals can contribute to their own campaign.

• Ruled that spending money on one’s own campaign is a form of constitutionally protected speech.

• Complicated congressional efforts to enact significant campaign finance reform.

Buckley v ValeoBuckley v Valeo

(1975)(1975)

supreme court flashcards: the rulings

Documents