170 likes | 357 Views
C3.2(2) LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES. Marbury v Madison (1803) ISSUE: Judicial Review This is in your C3.1(4) notes, add to these notes. C3.2(2). McCulloch v. Maryland (1819 ) ISSUE: Federalism (Necessary and Proper Clause) Q : Can the Government create a national bank?
E N D
C3.2(2) LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES Marbury v Madison (1803) ISSUE: Judicial Review This is in your C3.1(4) notes, add to these notes
C3.2(2) • McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) • ISSUE: Federalism (Necessary and Proper Clause) • Q: Can the Government create a national bank? • It is not granted that power in the Const. • A: yes. • WHY? Because Congress has “implied powers”(the elastic clause)
C3.2(2) • Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) • ISSUE: Federalism (Commerce Clause) • Q: When State Gov’t and Federal Gov’t laws conflict, who wins? • A: Federal Gov’t wins. • Why? Constitution gives Congress the right to regulate interstate (between state) commerce
C3.2(2) • Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) • ISSUE: Slavery (Due Process) • Q: Can an African-American sue someone in court? • A: No. • WHY? Because they are not citizens, so are not protected under the Constitution
C3.2(2) • Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) • ISSUE: Segregation (Equal Protection Clause) • Q: is it legal to have separate facilities for Blacks and Whites? • A: Yes • WHY? Segregation is constitutional (“separate but equal”)
C3.2(2) • Brown v. Board of Education (1954) • ISSUE: Segregation (Equal Protection) • Q: Is segregation legal? • A: No • WHY? State laws requiring “separate but equal” schools are unconstitutional
C3.2(2) • Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) • ISSUE: Right to a Lawyer (Due Process) • Q: Are states required to provide attorneys for some felony defendants? • A: Yes • WHY? States are bound by the Constitution, too
C3.2(2) • Mapp v. Ohio (1961) • ISSUE: Unreasonable Search and Seizure (Due Process) • Q: can police search your house without a warrant? • A: No • WHY: the Constitution prohibits “unreasonable search and seizure”
C3.2(2) • Miranda v. Arizona (1966) • ISSUE: Self-Incrimination • Q: can police question you without first notifying you of your rights? • A: No • WHY? The Constitution protects us from self-incrimination
C3.2(2) • Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) • ISSUE: Freedom of Speech • Q: Can students wear certain clothing as a form of protest? • A: Yes • WHY? Students do not lose their constitutional rights when they enter a school
C3.2(2) • United States v. Nixon (1974) • ISSUE: Checks and Balances • Q: Is the president immune from checks and balances under “executive privilege”? • A: No • WHY: Executive Privilege has limits
C3.2(2) • Regents of the U. of California v. Bakke (1978) • ISSUE: Affirmative Action (Equal Protection) • Q: should race help determine who is accepted to universities? • A: No and Yes • WHY? The University’s code was too rigid, but Affirmative Action is constitutional
C3.2(2) • New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) • ISSUE: Unreasonable Search and Seizure • Q: Do school officials need “probable cause” to search a student? • A: No • WHY? “probable cause” is for police outside of school, in school “reasonable suspicion” is enough
C3.2(2) • Texas v. Johnson (1989) • ISSUE: Freedom of Speech • Q: is burning the American flag protected under “freedom of speech”? • A: Yes • WHY? Freedom of speech protects even those who offend people
C3.2(2) • Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) • ISSUE: Censorship (Freedom of the Press) • Q: Can a principal censor student speech in a school newspaper? • A: Yes • WHY? Schools must set high standards for student speech in non-public forums
C3.2(1) SUMMARY QUESTIONS Choose 5 cases that interest you the most. Explain why you believe the Supreme Court got it right, or got it wrong.