Karteikarten
US Supreme Court evidence
Karten in diesem Stapel (28)
- 1Four cases protecting race and religion1954 Brown v Topeka 9-0; 1969 Alexander v Holmes; 2015 Holt v Hobbes 9-0; 2015 Equal Opportunities Commission v Abercrombie & Fitch
- 2Describe case Brown v TopekaSegregrated schools violate 14th amendment, overturned Plessy v Ferguson 1896
- 3Describe case Alexander v HolmesThe dual-school system is unconstitutional
- 4Describe case Holt v HobbesMuslim prisoners allowed to grow beards
- 5Describe the case Equal Opportunities Commission v Abercrombie & FitchMuslim women are not required to tell potential employers about wearing of hijabs
- 63 cases not protecting race and religion2000 Santa Fe v Dept of Education (prayers before game); 1987 Allegheny County v ACLU (no nativity scene in courthouse); 2003 Gratz v Bollinger (uni affirmative action is unconstitutional); 2016 Foster v Chatman (jury case)
- 7Three examples of SC protecting 1st amendment1989 Texas v Johnson (flag burning constitutional under 1st A); 1989 Flag Protection Act ruled unconstitutional; 2011 Snyder v Phelps (picketing of a funeral using offensive language is constitutional)
- 8Two examples of SC not protecting 1st A2015 Walker v Texas (Texas allowed to reject number plates bearing confederate flags); SC doesn't protect free speech when crime committed (perjury) or against government in some instances
- 9Four examples of SC protecting rights of the accused1966 Miranda rights to remain silent; 1972 Furman v Georgia (death penalty cruel + unusual - overturned); 2005 Hamsden v Rumsfeld (accused can't be tried in military courts; 2009 Graham v Florida (juvies cant be imprisoned without parole)
- 10Three cases not protecting the accused1991 Payne v Tennessee (juries can hear impact on victim evidence); 2008 Baze v Rees (death penalty not cruel and unusual); 2015 Glossip v Gross (unreliable drugs ok for executions)
- 11Four examples of SC protecting privacy1979 Roe v Wade (legalised abortion); 2000 Stenberg v Carhart (not a criminal offence to carry out abortion); 2014 Riley v California (police need search warrant to search phone); 2015 - SC says bulk collection of phone records is illegal under 2001 Patriot Act
- 121 example of SC not protecting privacyVery little interference or guidance on 2001 Patriot Act
- 133 cases of SC protecting women's rights1987 Johnson v Santa Clara County (affirmative action ok when improving job ratios); 1996 US v Virginia Military Academy (male only admission to academy unconstitutional); 2015 Young v UPS (pregnant women should be accommodated in the workplace)
- 142 examples of SC not protecting women's rightsA number of attempts to introduce equal rights for women amendment have failed. 1981 Rosker v Goldberg (male only draft for infantry is constitutional)
- 15- 2 examples of SC protecting 2nd amendment - 1 not protecting- 2008 DC v Heller (constitutional to use guns for self-defence); SC ruling in 2016 saying that stun guns are guns - first post-Scalia (pro-gun) decision
- 2008: SC said that no right is absolute and unlimited - 16Justice being impeachedThomas Porteous - 2010 impeached for bribery
- 17Case on same-sex marriage Case saying you can't exclude on grounds of sexuality2015 Obergefell v Hodge 5-4 (Roberts swing) - said its constitutional
2011 Christian Legal Council v Martinez - 18Cases upholding presidential legislation2012 National Federation of Business v Sibelius and 2015 King v Burwell - upheld Affordable Care Act
- 19Case preventing electoral reform2011 Citizens United v Federal Election Commission - can't restrict spending by big business on elections
- 202 cases limiting federal government1992 NY v US - states have control over controlling radioactive waste. 1995 US v Lopez - limited Congress power under the Commerce clause (gun control in schools)
- 214 cases limiting presidential power2004 Rasul v Bush - Guantanamo Bay foreign nationals have access to federal courts; 1997 Clinton v Jones - the president has no immunity from prosecution; 1974 US v Nixon limiting power of the president (8-0); 1998 Clinton v City of NY - the president cannot use a line by line veto on statutes passed by Congress
- 22Constitution gives judiciary too much powerSC overturns legislation of elected officials e.g. US v Lopez
- 23SC being political2000 Bush v Gore was a 5-4 decision (Kennedy swing)
- 24SC not doing a good jobNot protecting certain rights. Only 34% approval rating - 5-4 decisions are perfect in terms of bipartisanship but liberals and conservatives are still unhappy.
- 25The case that set precedent for judicial review!!!1803 Marbury v Madison
- 26Arguments that SC is political part iDe facto legislative role - often sent cases by Congress to deal with e.g. death penalty wouldn't be act of Congress. Importance of swing judge (e.g. Kennedy) - indicates political bias. Appointed by ideologically swayed Presidents e.g. 52-48 Clarence Thomas 1991.
- 27Arguments that SC is political part iiMitch McConnell on Merrick Garland: "I think it is safe to say there will not be hearings or votes". Kagan was Solicitor General. Politically important cases are 5-4: Obergefell v Hodges, Sibelius. Like for like appointments except Alito (O'Connor)
- 28SC is not politicalDoesn't align with party formally. Roberts: "you don't go to the ballpark to watch the umpire". Judicial philosophy. Not elected and tenure. Interpret laws, not make them. Vast majority of cases not 5-4: Roberts court 80% e.g. Snyder v Phelps 8-1, Holt v Hobbes 9-0. "Conservative in most cases, liberal in some"
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- US Supreme Court evidence
- Erstellt von
- Isabella Peterson
- Aufrufe
- 6
- Bewertung