Constitutional Amendments & Major Supreme Court Decisions

1. What was the significance of Marbury v. Madison?

When President Adams was defeated in the 1800 elections, he appointed a lot of Federalists to the federal courts. James Madison, who was the new secretary of state, would not deliver the commissions. An appointee, William Marbury asked the Supreme Court to deliever the commission. The court denied his request because the Judiciary Act he based his case on was found to be unconstitutional. This case established judicial review, or the power of the Supreme Court to decide the constituionality of a federal law.

The case involved a dispute over state boundaries between Maryland and Virginia.

The case established the principle of 'separate but equal' in regards to racial segregation.

The case led to the establishment of the first national bank in the United States.

Marbury v. Madison is a landmark case in United States Supreme Court history because it marked the first time the Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, establishing the principle of judicial review.

Explanation

Marbury v. Madison is a landmark case in United States Supreme Court history because it marked the first time the Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, establishing the principle of judicial review.

2. What Supreme Court case involved the re-examination of Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce?

This Supreme Court case involved the re-examination of the Congress's power to regulate interstate commerence. Aaron Ogden had a liscense for his New York ferry to operate steamboats to and from New York. He believed that Thomas Gibbon's federal coasting license didn't include landing rights. The Court concluded that New Yorks regulation laws were invalid and held that federal regulations took precedence because of the Supremacy clause. This ended up allowing the Federal government more power to regulate interstate business.

Roe v. Wade

Brown v. Board of Education

Marbury v. Madison

3. What was the ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson?

The case led to the integration of schools across the United States.

The Court found that African Americans were not entitled to any protection under the law.

The court ruled that segregation was unconstitutional and must be immediately abolished.

A Louisiana law require segregated seating for white and African American people on the public railroads. Herman Plessy believed that his "equal protection of the law" rights had been violated. The Court ruled that as long as the facilities were equal, it was allowed. They interperted the 14th Amendment as only meaning Negros were politically equal, thus "Seperate but Equal" was established.

In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was permissible as long as the facilities were equal. This decision established the doctrine of 'Separate but Equal', which allowed for racial segregation to continue in various public facilities.

Explanation

In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was permissible as long as the facilities were equal. This decision established the doctrine of 'Separate but Equal', which allowed for racial segregation to continue in various public facilities.

4. Which Supreme Court decision most dramatically changed life in the United States?

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

This Supreme Court decision was the case that most dramatically changed life in the United States. It was about a 10-year-old girl who lived in Topeka named Linda Brown. She was not permitted to attend a school in her own neighborhood because it was segregated and she was African American. The Court heard both arguments, trying to decide if the claus of "Seperate but Equal" had been violated The Court finally decided that the claus had no place in public education and it denied the equal protection of laws.

Gideon v. Wainwright

Roe v. Wade

Brown v. The Board of Education was a landmark case that ended racial segregation in public schools and was a significant victory for the Civil Rights Movement.

Explanation

Brown v. The Board of Education was a landmark case that ended racial segregation in public schools and was a significant victory for the Civil Rights Movement.

5. What was the outcome of the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade?

The case was dismissed by the Supreme Court due to lack of jurisdiction.

A Texas woman believed that a State law forbidding the artificial termination of a pregnancy violated her privacy rights. The Court supported the woman's right to make her own decision, but noted that the State had an "important and legitimate interest" in trying to protect the potential for human life. It established that the State could not regulate abortion in the first three months of pregnancy.

The Supreme Court ruled that states have the right to regulate all aspects of abortion, including banning it entirely.

The Supreme Court ruled that women do not have the right to make decisions about their own pregnancies.

Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court case that established a woman's right to privacy in making decisions about her own pregnancy, while also recognizing the State's interest in protecting potential human life. The ruling limited state regulation of abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy.

Explanation

Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court case that established a woman's right to privacy in making decisions about her own pregnancy, while also recognizing the State's interest in protecting potential human life. The ruling limited state regulation of abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy.

6. Mapp v. Ohio.

Mapp v. Ohio was a tax evasion case involving a prominent businessman.

This case involved an illegal search of Dollree Mapps house that was used to obtain evidence. Some State constitutions allowed this before. She appealed her convictions, saying that her 4th and 14th amendment rights had been violated. The Court agreed with her, saying that searches without a warrant and that were unreasonable had no meaning unless the searches were excluded. This also helped develope the concept of "incorporation."

The Court ruled in favor of allowing warrantless searches in all cases.

The case involved a dispute over property rights in Ohio.

Mapp v. Ohio was a landmark case in the United States that dealt with the issue of illegal searches and the protection of individual rights under the 4th and 14th amendments. The case established the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of evidence obtained through illegal searches in court proceedings. It was a significant step in protecting the rights of individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement.

Explanation

Mapp v. Ohio was a landmark case in the United States that dealt with the issue of illegal searches and the protection of individual rights under the 4th and 14th amendments. The case established the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of evidence obtained through illegal searches in court proceedings. It was a significant step in protecting the rights of individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement.

7. Miranda v. Arizona

Miranda v. California - A case involving the search and seizure of evidence without a warrant.

After Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and sexual assault, he signed a confession, which also included a statement saying that he understood his leag rights. After he was convicted, he appealed, saying that withough counsel or warning, the confession was not legally gained. The Court agreed with him, establishing that suspects must be told their rights at the time of their arrest.

Miranda v. Florida - A case involving the right to a speedy trial.

Miranda v. Texas - A case involving religious freedom in public schools.

8. What was the significance of the case Gideon v. Wainwright?

Clarence Earl Gideon was found guilty of murder in Florida.

The Supreme Court ruled against appointing counsel for capital crimes.

A court in Florida found Clarence Earl Gideal guilty of breaking and entering in 1961. He was sentenced to five years in prison. He appealed his case to the Supreme Court, saying he had been unconstitutionally denied counsel during his trial because he could not pay for one, and because it was not a capital crime, the court would not appoint one. Gideon got a new trial and won with his court appointed lawyer. This established that even poor people have the right to counsel when facing a felony charge.

Gideon v. Wainwright established the right to a jury trial for all defendants.

Gideon v. Wainwright was a landmark case that ensured that individuals facing felony charges had the right to legal counsel, regardless of their ability to pay for one.

Explanation

Gideon v. Wainwright was a landmark case that ensured that individuals facing felony charges had the right to legal counsel, regardless of their ability to pay for one.

9. What was the outcome of the Tinker v. Des Moines case?

Wearing an armband expressing an opinion is considered disruptive behavior.

Students cannot express their opinions while at school.

This established that students do not shed their freedom of speech right when they are at school. The Court said that schools must be ready for the possibility of substancial disruption before the schools can limit free speech. They said that students can display their own opinions as long as they do not disrupt classwork, create a lot of disorder, or interfere with the rights of others.Thus, wearing an armband silently expresses an opinion and generates none of the earlier stated effects.

Schools have the right to limit free speech regardless of potential disruption.

10. What was the outcome of the Engel v. Vitale case?

The Court ruled that the prayer did not violate the 1st amendment rights of the parents and students.

The State Board of Regents of New York used to require that a 22-word pray was said at the beginning of each school day. Some parents filed a suit because of this, saying that it went against 1st amendment rights. The Court agreed that it was unconstitutional, because the prayer definitely had religious beliefs in it.

The case was dismissed due to lack of standing from the parents who filed the suit.

The Court ruled in favor of the State Board of Regents of New York, allowing the prayer to continue.

The correct answer highlights the Court's decision to declare the prayer requirement unconstitutional due to its religious content, emphasizing the protection of 1st amendment rights.

Explanation

The correct answer highlights the Court's decision to declare the prayer requirement unconstitutional due to its religious content, emphasizing the protection of 1st amendment rights.

11. What was the outcome of the case Texas v. Johnson?

The case was dismissed due to lack of evidence.

The Supreme Court ruled that flag burning is not a form of protected speech.

Johnson was found guilty and sentenced to prison.

After burning a flag, Johnson was put on trial for desecrating an American flag. The case was centered around trying to decide if the action of expression was protected under the 1st Amendment's freedom of speech clause. It was ultimately decided, by close vote, that his expression was protected, like that of Tinker v. Des Moines.

Texas v. Johnson was a landmark Supreme Court case that upheld the right to desecrate the American flag as a form of political expression protected under the First Amendment.

Explanation

Texas v. Johnson was a landmark Supreme Court case that upheld the right to desecrate the American flag as a form of political expression protected under the First Amendment.

12. What was the significance of the Furman v. Georgia case?

The case was about environmental protection laws

The case was about tax evasion by a business owner

There are three different cases that contributed to th is Court decision. There was a question of racial imbalance in the use of the death sentence by State Courts. In Georgia, Furman was convicted and sentenced to death. The Court decided to overturn the already-existing State laws regarding the death penalty. Because of this, many States re-wrote their death penalty laws.

The case was about property rights in Georgia

Furman v. Georgia was a landmark case that dealt with the issue of racial imbalance in the death penalty and led to the overturning of existing State laws regarding the death penalty.

Explanation

Furman v. Georgia was a landmark case that dealt with the issue of racial imbalance in the death penalty and led to the overturning of existing State laws regarding the death penalty.

13. What was the central issue in the case of Korematsu v. United States?

The case involved a dispute over territory between the United States and Japan

This case was centered around the Executive order to place all Japanese-Americans in internment camps during World War II. The Court supported the military order because of the circumstances surrounding WWII. The Court also added that restrictions were never legitimate on the basis of racial antagonism itself.

The case questioned the legality of the United States government's decision to enter World War II

The case challenged the constitutionality of the United States military draft system

Korematsu v. United States was a landmark Supreme Court case dealing with the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. The incorrect answers provided do not accurately reflect the central issue in this case.

Explanation

Korematsu v. United States was a landmark Supreme Court case dealing with the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. The incorrect answers provided do not accurately reflect the central issue in this case.

14. What was the ruling in Employment Division v. Smith?

The Court ruled that the Oregon unemployment division could not deny benefits to someone who was fired for using peyote during a religious ceremony.

The Court ruled that the State must provide unemployment benefits to individuals regardless of the circumstances of their termination.

The Court ruled the the Oregon unemployment division could deny benefits to someone who was fired for using illegal substances during a religious ceremony, during which Smith ate peyote. Peyote is used by American Indians during rituals and it is illegal in Oregon. This established that the State could deny anybody who was fired for doing anything illegal unemployment benefits.

The Court ruled that using illegal substances for religious purposes is protected under the First Amendment.

The correct ruling in Employment Division v. Smith was that the Oregon unemployment division could deny benefits to someone who was fired for using illegal substances during a religious ceremony, where Smith consumed peyote. This established that the State could deny benefits to individuals terminated for illegal activities.

Explanation

The correct ruling in Employment Division v. Smith was that the Oregon unemployment division could deny benefits to someone who was fired for using illegal substances during a religious ceremony, where Smith consumed peyote. This established that the State could deny benefits to individuals terminated for illegal activities.

15. What was the outcome of the case New Jersey v. T.L.O.?

The evidence obtained was ruled inadmissible and the case was dismissed.

T.L.O, a New Jersey High School student, was suspected of smoking in the school lavaratory, but she denied the claim. The vice-principal conducted a search of her purse and found cigarettes, marijauna, and evidence that she had been involved in marijauna dealings that occured at the school. Because of this, T.L.O. was sentenced to probation by a juvenile court. She appealed, saying that the evidence had been obtained during an unreasonable search, without a warrant. The Court did not agree with T.L.O. saying that the school had a good reason to conduct the search in order to secure a safe learning environment. They also stated that easing of some restrictions must take place at school on grounds of "reasonable suspicion, like "probable cause" is needed for wider society.

T.L.O. was found innocent of all charges.

The vice-principal was found guilty of conducting an illegal search.

16. What does the 1st Amendment spell out?

Right to a speedy and public trial.

Freedom to bear arms and form a militia.

Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

This amendment spells out the many freedoms we have such as Freedom of speech, Freedom of press, No established religion, Right to peaceably assemble, And freedom to petition the government for redress of grievences. It all means pretty much exactly what it says.

The 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution grants important freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the right to assemble peacefully. It does not specifically address the rights related to bearing arms, trial processes, or protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Explanation

The 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution grants important freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the right to assemble peacefully. It does not specifically address the rights related to bearing arms, trial processes, or protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

17. What is the 2nd Amendment commonly interpreted as?

Right to bear arms. The meaning of this amendment is debated. Some believes it means that we should have a militia. Others think it refers to an individuals right to bear arms.

Right to freedom of speech

Right to vote

Right to a fair trial

The 2nd Amendment is often debated, with some believing it refers to the right to bear arms.

Explanation

The 2nd Amendment is often debated, with some believing it refers to the right to bear arms.

18. What does the 3rd Amendment protect against?

The 3rd Amendment allows soldiers to take over any residence they wish.

Soldiers are allowed to stay in any house they choose without permission during peacetime.

All citizens must provide free housing to soldiers during times of peace.

No soldier, shall, in times of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner. This comes from an old british military tradition in which their soliders would come into the colonists houses and stay there whenever they needed somewhere to stay. The colonists did not like this.

The 3rd Amendment protects against the quartering of soldiers in citizens' homes without the owner's consent during times of peace.

Explanation

The 3rd Amendment protects against the quartering of soldiers in citizens' homes without the owner's consent during times of peace.

19. What principle is protected by the 5th Amendment of the United States Constitution?

C) Protection against unreasonable search and seizure

A) Freedom of speech

B) Right to bear arms

Self-incrimination. No person will be held accountable for any crime (capital or infamous) without a grand jury, except for those in the armed forces in a time of war or public danger. No one can be tried for the same crime more than once nor will they ever be forced to be a witness against themselves. Cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without due proccess of law. Private property cannot be taken for public use without fair payment.

The 5th Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination, double jeopardy, and ensures due process of law.

Explanation

The 5th Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination, double jeopardy, and ensures due process of law.

20. What rights does the 6th Amendment guarantee to the accused?

In all trials, the accused shall have to the right to a speedy and public trial, by an unbiased jury in the state and district the crime was committed. The accused has the right to be informed of the reason why they are being accused, and for what. they also have the right to confront the witnesses against them and have witnesses in his favor. The accused also has the right for Assistance of Counsel for his defense, which is like a defense attorney.

The accused has the right to choose the prosecutor for their trial.

The accused has the right to a trial by combat.

The accused has the right to determine their own guilt or innocence.

The 6th Amendment ensures specific rights for the accused in criminal trials, such as the right to a speedy and public trial, an unbiased jury, and legal counsel for their defense. The incorrect answers provided do not accurately reflect the protections guaranteed by the 6th Amendment.

Explanation

The 6th Amendment ensures specific rights for the accused in criminal trials, such as the right to a speedy and public trial, an unbiased jury, and legal counsel for their defense. The incorrect answers provided do not accurately reflect the protections guaranteed by the 6th Amendment.

21. What does the 7th Amendment refer to?

A rule that outlines the process of electing the President and Vice President.

A provision that grants the freedom of speech and religion.

A constitutional amendment establishing the right to bear arms.

This is about civil, not criminal trials. It says that if any accused person stands to lose money ($20), they are granted the right to demand a trial by jury. It also means that once this type of case is decided by a trial, it cannot be changed unless the rules of common laws are upheld.

The 7th Amendment specifically pertains to civil trials and the right to a trial by jury for cases involving amounts over $20.

Explanation

The 7th Amendment specifically pertains to civil trials and the right to a trial by jury for cases involving amounts over $20.

22. What is stated in the 8th Amendment?

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

All individuals have the right to bear arms.

No bail or fine shall be set too high for the accused to pay. Also, no cruel or unusual punishment should be inflicted. Cruel and unusual punishment is not easily defined, as it changes with the generations.

The President shall be elected by an electoral college.

The correct answer outlines the principles of the 8th Amendment, which prohibits excessive bail, fines, and cruel and unusual punishment. The incorrect answers do not accurately reflect the content of the 8th Amendment.

Explanation

The correct answer outlines the principles of the 8th Amendment, which prohibits excessive bail, fines, and cruel and unusual punishment. The incorrect answers do not accurately reflect the content of the 8th Amendment.

23. What does the 9th Amendment of the United States Constitution signify?

This amendment guarantees the right to a speedy and public trial by jury.

This amendment is basically saying that just because a right is not listed in the constitution does not mean that it does not exist.

This amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

This amendment establishes the right to bear arms.

The 9th Amendment is often interpreted to mean that the rights enumerated in the Constitution are not the only rights that people have. It serves as a reminder that individuals have rights that are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution but are still protected.

Explanation

The 9th Amendment is often interpreted to mean that the rights enumerated in the Constitution are not the only rights that people have. It serves as a reminder that individuals have rights that are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution but are still protected.

24. What does the 10th Amendment state?

B. The 10th Amendment restricts state governments from exercising any authority not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.

A. The 10th Amendment grants the federal government exclusive power over all state matters.

C. The 10th Amendment declares that the federal government has authority over all aspects of governance within the nation.

This amendment says that any power not given to the federal government is reserved to the state or the people.

The 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people, emphasizing the principle of federalism.

Explanation

The 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people, emphasizing the principle of federalism.