Please wait - loading…

AP Gov Cases (Unit 3)

Description

List of the six cases needed to know for Unit 3 of AP Government.
Isra Catori
Mind Map by Isra Catori, updated more than 1 year ago
Isra Catori
Created by Isra Catori over 6 years ago
25
2

Resource summary

AP Gov Cases (Unit 3)
  1. Barrons V. Baltimore (1833)
    1. Barron sued city, claiming that property had been damaged. Argued 5th Amend.
      1. Ruling: Bill of Rights does not apply to states, Only restricted the National Government.
      2. Gibbons V. Ogden (1824)
        1. Question on who should regulate after monopoly was granted to a private company.
          1. National Government wins, Has power to regulate interstate commerce.
            1. Interpreted the commerce clause for the first time, dramatically increased national power over the states.
            2. Gitlow V. New York (1925)
              1. Gitlow argued that state law was in violation of the free speech clause of the 1st Amendment
                1. Decided Bill of Rights did apply to states, Due Process clause of 14th Amendment guarantees application to the states.
                  1. States were not free to violate these rights.
                2. Heart of Atlanta Motel V. United States
                  1. Hotel owner refused to accept african american customers at hotel on the grounds that his business was intrastate.
                    1. Business served interstate travels, therefore was subject to conditions of Civil Rights Act of 1964.
                      1. Used the commerce clause to force private businesses to abide by the Civil RIghts Act.
                    2. McCulloch V. Maryland (1819)
                      1. State of Maryland argued that power to create bank was not among the delegated powers of Congress.
                        1. Dismissed charges, bank was constitutional due to implied power ('collect taxes, borrow money and regulate commerce')
                          1. Affirmed the Supremacy Clause- expanded power of the National Government.
                        2. United States V. Lopez (1995)
                          1. Convicted of violating the GFSZA, argued that congress did not have power to adopt GFSZA in the first place.
                            1. Supreme Court ruled that GFSZA was unconstitutional and overturned Lopez's conviction.
                              1. Case begins to restrict power of the National Gov't.
                              Show full summary Hide full summary

                              Similar

                              The Constitution Review
                              Kate S
                              AP Gov Semester
                              Natalie Hayes
                              How a Bill Becomes a Law
                              victoria russ
                              Politcal Science Chapter 1
                              Khafra Mills
                              Civil Rights Study Test
                              Thomas Dodie James
                              Organization of the Presidency
                              Victoria Smith
                              Political Knowledge in the United States
                              Jordan Hilder
                              Chapter 1 Key Terms
                              Andrew Mosier
                              Chapter 1 Key Terms
                              emily leventhal
                              3: American Federalism
                              kcbearxoxo
                              AP Gov Chapter 2 SAFMEDS
                              jpauleen