| Setting the Tone | 1st Amendment | Campaign and Press | Religion | Your Rights |
| 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 |
| 30 | 30 | 30 | 30 | 30 |
| 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
| 50 | 50 | 50 | 50 | 50 |
| Final Question | ||||
- Article I, section 8, Necessary and Proper Clause and National Supremacy
- Article I, section 8, Necessary and Proper Clause and National Supremacy
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Chief Justice Marshall established “judicial review'
Chief Justice Marshall established “judicial review'
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
5th amendment (eminent domain) did not apply to states but only to the federal gov’t (BOR does NOT apply to STATES).
5th amendment (eminent domain) did not apply to states but only to the federal gov’t (BOR does NOT apply to STATES).
Barron v. Baltimore (1833)
under the circumstances created a “clear and present” danger... Although later decisions modified the decision, this case created the PRECEDENT that 1st amendment guarantees weren’t absolute
under the circumstances created a “clear and present” danger... Although later decisions modified the decision, this case created the PRECEDENT that 1st amendment guarantees weren’t absolute
Schenck v. US (1919)
The case, involving “criminal anarchy”, under New York law, was the first consideration of what came to be known as the selective “incorporation” doctrine, under which the provisions of the 1st amendment were “incorporated” by the 14th amendment
The case, involving “criminal anarchy”, under New York law, was the first consideration of what came to be known as the selective “incorporation” doctrine, under which the provisions of the 1st amendment were “incorporated” by the 14th amendment
Gitlow v. New York (1925)
-Freedom of Speech and Expression (1st Amendment) -Ruling- allowed to wear the black arm bands -Precedent- “Student’s right to expression would be protected except in cases where that expression materially disrupts class work or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others...
-Freedom of Speech and Expression (1st Amendment) -Ruling- allowed to wear the black arm bands -Precedent- “Student’s right to expression would be protected except in cases where that expression materially disrupts class work or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others...
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
-Freedom of Speech (1st amendment) -Ruling- Texas statute prohibiting the burning of the flag is unconstitutional -Precedent- You may burn the flag
-Freedom of Speech (1st amendment) -Ruling- Texas statute prohibiting the burning of the flag is unconstitutional -Precedent- You may burn the flag
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
held that laws that punish people for advocating social change through violence violate the first amendment, the advocacy of an idea even an idea of violence is protected by the 1st amendment. What is not protected is inciting people to engage in violence
held that laws that punish people for advocating social change through violence violate the first amendment, the advocacy of an idea even an idea of violence is protected by the 1st amendment. What is not protected is inciting people to engage in violence
Bradenburg v. Ohio (1969)
-upheld soft and hard money limits and the ban of electioneering not subject to the cap within the 90 day window before a federal election
-upheld soft and hard money limits and the ban of electioneering not subject to the cap within the 90 day window before a federal election
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003)
- The Supreme Court loosened restrictions on corporate and union-funded television ads that air close to elections, weakening a key provision of a landmark campaign finance law.
- The Supreme Court loosened restrictions on corporate and union-funded television ads that air close to elections, weakening a key provision of a landmark campaign finance law.
F.E.C. v. Wisconsin Right to Life and McCain v. Wisconsin Right to Life (2006)
-established the prior restraint doctrine AND -Selective Incorporation of the 1st amendment freedom of press
-established the prior restraint doctrine AND -Selective Incorporation of the 1st amendment freedom of press
Near v. Minnesota (1931)
-the Court refused the halt publication of the Pentagon Papers (detailed critical account of US involvement in Vietnam).
-the Court refused the halt publication of the Pentagon Papers (detailed critical account of US involvement in Vietnam).
New York Times v. US (1971)
-Precedent- schools could censor student speech when schools had a reasonable educational justification for their censorship esp. when the speech was part of an educational activity
-Precedent- schools could censor student speech when schools had a reasonable educational justification for their censorship esp. when the speech was part of an educational activity
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
-Precedent- US S.C. outlawed the use, even on a voluntary basis, of state- sponsored prayer in schools
-Precedent- US S.C. outlawed the use, even on a voluntary basis, of state- sponsored prayer in schools
Engel v. Vitale (1962)-
Struck down state funding for private religious schools
Struck down state funding for private religious schools
Lemon v. Kurzman (1971)-
The Court upheld a stringent application of California obscenity law by Newport Beach, CA, and attempted to define what is obscene.
The Court upheld a stringent application of California obscenity law by Newport Beach, CA, and attempted to define what is obscene.
Miller v. California (1973)
Court considered the use of public funds for the operation of school buses in NJ, including buses carrying students to parochial school. The Court permitted New Jersey to continue payments, saying that the aid to children was not gov’t support for religion.
Court considered the use of public funds for the operation of school buses in NJ, including buses carrying students to parochial school. The Court permitted New Jersey to continue payments, saying that the aid to children was not gov’t support for religion.
Everson v. Board of Education (1947)-
the Court defined obscene that which offended “the average person, applying contemporary community standards.”
the Court defined obscene that which offended “the average person, applying contemporary community standards.”
Roth v. US (1957)
exclusionary rule applies to states
exclusionary rule applies to states
Mapp v. Ohio- 1961
The Court this created a “reasonable suspicion” rule for school searches, a change from the “probable cause” requirement in the wider society.
The Court this created a “reasonable suspicion” rule for school searches, a change from the “probable cause” requirement in the wider society.
NJ v. TLO- 1985
-Precedent- guarantee of counsel (attorney) for all person facing a felony charge in federal and state trials
-Precedent- guarantee of counsel (attorney) for all person facing a felony charge in federal and state trials
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
-Precedent- “have a right to remain silent, that anything said can be used in Court, right to an attorney, if he can’t afford one, one will be appointed for him” etc.
-Precedent- “have a right to remain silent, that anything said can be used in Court, right to an attorney, if he can’t afford one, one will be appointed for him” etc.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
- The Court upheld the Georgia death sentence, finding that it did NOT violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the 8th Amendment. The Court stated for the first time that “punishment of death does NOT invariably violate the Constitution.”
- The Court upheld the Georgia death sentence, finding that it did NOT violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the 8th Amendment. The Court stated for the first time that “punishment of death does NOT invariably violate the Constitution.”
Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
-9th amendment (right to privacy) and 14th amendment -Precedent- “women have a fundamental right to privacy'
-9th amendment (right to privacy) and 14th amendment -Precedent- “women have a fundamental right to privacy'
Roe. v. Wade (1973)
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What Would You Like To Risk?
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Final Score:
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Review Game Info:
You must save this address to be able to find and share your game!