5 Written questions
5 Matching questions
- Kelo v. New London (2005)
- Wesberry v. Sanders (1964)
- Clinton v. New York City (1997)
- Palko v. Connecticut (1937)
- Buckley v. Valeo (1976)
- a Provided test for determining which parts of Bill of Rights should be applicable to the states - those which are fundamentally necessary for liberty to exist.
- b "Eminent Domain" may be used to take private property for the public good even if this means giving it to private developers.
- c Reaffirmed the "one person, one vote" decision of the 1962 case of Baker v. Carr when redistricting for federal elections. Each congressional district must be approximately the same in constituent size.
- d Candidates can use as much of their own money as they want to support their own campaigns.
- e Ruled that the law granting the president the line item-veto was unconstitutional.
5 Multiple choice questions
- This established a three-part test by which governments can determine if their actions violate the Establishment Clause of the constitution: is the Law clearly secular, does neither prohibit nor inhibit religion, and is there excessive gov't. entanglement.
- By a 5-to-4 vote along ideological lines, the majority held that under the First Amendment corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited.
- The Sixth Amendment 's guarantee of counsel is a fundamental right, and through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, this made it applicable to states, which now had to provide an attorney if a defendant couldn't afford one.
- Libel case-writer did it with intent to defame-knew it was false-wrote it with malicious intent. Public officials/figures have less privacy rights.
- Although not phrased as such in the ruling, this case established the "separate but equal" principle as being constitutional and in line with the 14th Amendment. It determined that segregation did not constitute unlawful discrimination.
5 True/False questions
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) → Ruled that obscene materials did not enjoy First Amendment protection. Modified the test for obscenity, holding that "[t]he basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest. . . (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."
U.S. v. Nixon (1974) → Gun Free School Zones Act exceeded Congress' authority to regulate interstate commerce. The law is a criminal statute that has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic activity.
Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) → Congress has the right to prohibit speech that causes a "clear and present danger." During wartime, utterances tolerable in peacetime can be punished.
McCullough v. Maryland (1819) → In establishing a national bank, Congress was legally applying the "necessary and proper clause" of the Constitution, thus exercising powers not specifically delegated to Congress but implied by its enumerated powers.
Bush v. Gore (2001) → Gun Free School Zones Act exceeded Congress' authority to regulate interstate commerce. The law is a criminal statute that has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic activity.