Create an account
Reynolds Vs. US
ruled against a polygamist by saying that the first amend. protects religious belief, but does not protect religious practices considered to be illegal
Wisconsin Vs. Yoder
The Amish parents didn't want kids going to school after 8th grade
their interests in free exercise of religion under 1st amend outweighed State's interests in compelling school...
Abington (school district) Vs. Schempp
Case questioning Bible reading in public schools
Rule: violated establishment clause of 1st amend.
Minersville School District Vs. Gobitis
Jehovah's witnesses were expelled from school for refusing to salute flag
rule: schools could require saluting of the flag
West VA State BOE Vs. Barnette
WV regarded refusal to salute flag as insubordination and was punishable by expulsion
Rule: compelling public-schoolchildren to salute flag was unconstitutional
Engel Vs. Vitale
Daily prayer in pubic school considered to be uncontitutional even when voluntary and nondenominational; court stated that by providing the prayer, NY officially approved religion
violated Establishment clause of 1st amend.
wallace vs jaffree
by Alabama law teachers were required to conduct moment of silence in class during school day
court ruled that this was a violation of 1st amend.'s establishment clause
tinker vs des moines
3 students were suspended after refusing to remove their armbands in protest of Vietnam war
court culed that the wearing of armbands was "closely akin to 'pure speech'" and protected by 1st amend.
student "symbolic expression"
texas vs johnson
man was convicted for going against TX law for burning the flag as means of protest against Reagan...
Court ruled that his flag burning was protected expression under 1st amend.; the fact that an audience takes offense to certain ideas or expression doesn't justify prohibitions of speech
NSPA vs (village of) Skokie
Nazi group planned to peacefully demonstrate in fron of (village) hall but village ordinance wouldn't allow it;
tried to use Heckler's Veto to ban Nazi march
court rule: city can't ban racist speech (SKokie couldn't prevent Nazi from marching) ideas can't be suppressed simply bc they are offensive to some hearers
Schenck vs US
man petitioned against draft during WWI
he violated Espionage act of 1917
man was not protected by first amend bc he posed a "clear and present danger"
hazelwood vs kuhlmeier
principal of school excluded articles of a student-run school newspaper bc he found them to be inappropriate; students believed this violated their right to freedom of speech given by 1st amend.
court rule: 1st amend. did not require schools to affirmatively promote particular types of student speech (court did not rule in favor of students)
weeks vs US
man was convicted based on papers obtained by police during a warrantless search of his home; he argued for the return of his possessions and that the search and seizure violated 4th amend.
court rule: the search and seizure of man's home was completely unconstitutional
mapp vs Ohio
police illegally searched woman's house for a fugitive and found obscene materials;
court ruled: "all evidence obtained by searches and seizure in violation of the Constitution is, by 4th amend., unadmissible in a state court."
US vs Leon
supreme court rule: there is a "good faith" exception to the exclusionary rule for evidence obtained by a mistakenly issued warrant (could still be used in court)
preponderance of the evidence (to win a Civil case);
beyond a reasonable doubt
these are 3 examples of
New Jersey vs TLO
14yr old girl was accused of smoking, so principal searched her purse, yielding drug paraphenalia, etc
girl protested that prinicpal's questioning/searching violated her rights given by the 4th and 14th amendments
court ruled: the search was not in violation of the Constitution;
allows teachers to search based on reasonable suspicion
Terry vs Ohio
case regarding warrantless pat-downs; officer (plain clothed) frisked 3 men and found weapons on 2 of them
court rule: search undertaken by the officer was reasonable under 4th amend. and weapons seized could be introduced into evidence against the men; this type of warrantless searching was designed to protect officer(s) safety
Miranda vs AZ
set up the rights of the suspected criminal
court was asked to consider the contitutionality of a # of instances in which defendants were questioned "while in custody or otherwise deprived of freedom in any significant way"
questioned police practices of interrogatinf individs w/o notifying them of right to counsel and protections against self-incrimination
court rule: prosecutors couldn't use any statements from interrogation of defendants unless they demonstrated use of prtocedural safeguards "effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination"
betts vs brady
...person wanted to know if denying a request for counsel for an indigent defendant violated the due process clause of 14th amend. which embraces the defendants right to counsel guarunteed by 6th amend.
court ruled: previously discovered right to counseld by 14th amend. doesn't compel states to provide counsel to any defendant........ A lawyer was only appointed in a 'special circumstance' and being poor wasn't considered a special circumstance
gideon vs wainwright
after being charged w/ felony, court denied man's request for lawyer to defend him; couldn't afford lawyer so defended himself and found guilty; he stated that his right to counsel under 14th had been violated; court brought up 6th amend. right to counsel and he was retried w/ help of counsel and found innocent
court rules: he had right to be represented by court-appointed attorney, overturned 1942 ruling Betts vs Brady
provided attorney for felony
escobedo vs illinois
after arrested and taken for ?ing, this man was denied several requests to speak w/ his lawyer; lawyer even unsuccessfully attempted to consult w. him; eventually, man confessed to murder; question: was he denied right to counsel by 6th amend.
court rule: he had not been adequately informed of his constitutional right to remain silent rather than forced to incriminate himself
furman vs GA
after being caught, burglar tripped and fell on gun, causing it to fire and kill a resident of the home; he was convicted of murder and sentenced to death
?: imposition and carrying out of death penalty in these cases cruel and unsual punishment i violation of 8th and 14th amend.?
court rule: imposition of death penalty in these cases constituted cruel and unusual punishment and violated Constitution
Gregg vs GA
man found guily of armed robbery and murder then sentenced to death;...he challenged that remaining sentence for murder was "cruel and unusual" punishment in violation of 8th and 14th
court rule: punishment of death didn't violate 8th and 14th amendments under all circumstances;
have to have a jury convict crime & have jury to sentence criminal to death
plessy vs ferguson
black citizen was jailed after refusing to leave car reserved for whites; appealed to Supreme court that state law ordering racial segregation on trains was unconstitutional by equal protection clauses of 14th amend.
rule: "Separate but Equal"
Brown vs Board of Education
girl wasn't allowed to go to the "white school" 4 blocks away ans instead had to travel 21 blocks for the nearest all-black school
ruling: local school systems should develop their own plans to desegregate and take effect with 'all deliberate speed"
overruled "Separate but Equal"
Dred Scott vs Sanford
slave believed moving into free territory granted his freedom so he sued his owner for moving him out of a free state and back into a slave territory
court rule: congress didn't have power to prohibit slavery in territories, making Missouri compromise of 1829 unconstitutional; they stated blacks weren't citizen of US and couldn't become citizens and therefore couldn't sue in a court
speech (and press)
Tinker vs Des Moines,
Texas vs Johnson,
Hazelwood vs Kuhlmeier,
Schenck vs US, and
Abrams vs US
are court cases dealing with the 1st amendments freedom of...
Abington vs Schempp,
Engel vs Vitale, and
Wallace vs Jaffree
are court cases dealing with the 1st amends.....
free exercise clause
Reynolds vs US,
NSPA vs Skokie,
Wisconsin vs Yoder,
Minersville vs Gobitis, and
WV BOE vs Barnette
are court cases dealing with 1st amends....
Weeks vs US,
Mapp vs Ohio,
US vs Leon,
New Jersey vs TLO, and
Terry vs Ohio
are court cases dealing with which amendment
Betts vs Brady,
Gideon vs Wainwright, and
Escobedo vs Illinois
are court cases dealing with which amendment
plessy vs ferguson,
brown vs board of education,
dred scott vs sanford, and
Swann vs charlotte-meck
are court cases dealing with the 14th amendment and what
rights of the accused
mapp vs ohio
gregg vs GA
gideon vs wainwright
miranda vs AZ
are cases involving (rights of who)
power of National Govt
gibbons vs ogden
mcculloch vs maryland
marbury vs madison
are cases involving (power of who)
amendment the provides freedoms:
-press (printed speech)
-religion (any belief; 2 clauses)
power of govt to take land from citizens when needed for public benefit as long as the citizen is compensated
type of jury that determines whether ther is enough evidence to formally charge (indict) someone with the crime
(no) double jeopardy
one can't be charged with the same case after they have been acquitted by a jury of that same crime (case)
-speedy public trial
-right to a lawyer
-informed of all charges
-question of all witness
succession of office of President
3. Speaker of House
4. Pres. Protempore
5. Secretary of State
legal term for publicly telling a false and damaging statement about someone
(limits free speech)
clear and present danger
idea that one's speech is not free if that speech could endanger the lives of people around them
(limits freedom of speech)
statement in 1st amend. that forbids the govt from proclaiming an official religion
separation of church and state
famous phrase from a letter by Thomas Jefferson that discusses his belief in the role bt the govt and religion
legal term for the false and damaging printing of a statement about a person
(limit to freedom of press)
In order to have the freedom of this by 1st amendment, it must be peaceful and a permit may be required
simply a request to the govt that they are not required to respond to or take action against
we are given this right with:
gun control law, automatic weapons ban?, and firearm registrations?
This controversial 2001 law allows anti-terrorism authorities to monitor e-mail and Internet traffic in order to prevent terrorist attacks. The government argues that cyberspace is public domain and that no warrants should be needed to access information.
Please allow access to your computer’s microphone to use Voice Recording.
Having trouble? Click here for help.
We can’t access your microphone!
Click the icon above to update your browser permissions and try again
Reload the page to try again!Reload
Press Cmd-0 to reset your zoom
Press Ctrl-0 to reset your zoom
It looks like your browser might be zoomed in or out. Your browser needs to be zoomed to a normal size to record audio.
Please upgrade Flash or install Chrome
to use Voice Recording.
For more help, see our troubleshooting page.
Your microphone is muted
For help fixing this issue, see this FAQ.
Star this term
You can study starred terms together