Go on. Explore!

lvl 0 • 0 xp

lvl 1

Home Market Decks Interests

Politics

memorize.ai (lvl 286)

(0)

39 cards

()

Section 1

Preview this deck

Fair Housing Act of 1968

Front

1 / 39

Politics

0.0

0 reviews

5			0
4			0
3			0
2			0
1			0

Active users

All-time users

Favorites

Last updated

6 years ago

Date created

Mar 1, 2020

Cards (39)

Section 1

(39 cards)

Fair Housing Act of 1968

Front

banned discrimination in the rental or sale of housing

Back

United States v. Place

Front

A drug dog's "sniff test" is not a search.

Back

enumerated powers

Front

The powers explicitly given to Congress in the Constitution.

Back

Weeks vs. US (1914)

Front

established the use of the exclusionary rule - any evidence illegally seized cannot be used in a court of law

Back

Federalist Paper #10

Front

Written by James Madison to convince people to support the ratification of the constitution. Argued that factions were inevitable but were best controlled by a large republic that employed a Federalist structure. Argued that competition among factions would limit their negative impacts.

Back

Powell v. Alabama (1932)

Front

an attorney must be provided to a poor defendant facing the death penalty

Back

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

Front

the Supreme Court upheld the power of the national government and denied the right of a state to tax the federal bank using the Constitution's supremacy clause. The Court's broad interpretation of the necessary and proper clause paved the way for later rulings upholding expansive federal powers

Back

Gray v. Sanders (1963)

Front

one person, one vote

Back

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

Front

No racial gerrymandering

Back

Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967

Front

Bans age discrimination for jobs unless age is related to job performance

Back

concurrent powers

Front

Powers held jointly by the national and state governments.

Back

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

Front

Established exclusionary rule; illegally obtained evidence cannot be used in court; Warren Court's judicial activism.

Back

Federalist No. 51: who wrote it? What does it deal with?

Front

written by James MAdison, the author assured readers they did not need to fear that the national government would grow too powerful. He argued under the newly proposed federal government would have checks and balances and separation of powers which would not allow the government too much power. "Ambition must be made to counteract Ambition".

Back

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014)

Front

A for-profit corporation could be exempt from providing contraceptives for their female employees

Back

Brown vs. Board of Education (1954)

Front

This case overruled the "seperate but equal" doctrine.

Back

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Front

Abortion rights fall within the privacy implied in the 14th amendment

Back

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

Front

The Supreme Court upheld broad congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The Court's broad interpretation of the Constitution's commerce clause paved the way for later rulings upholding expansive federal powers.

Back

Civil Rights act of 1957

Front

Primarily a voting rights bill, was the first civil rights legislation enacted by Republicans in the United States since Reconstruction.

Back

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Front

Separate but equal

Back

United States v. Wrightwood Diary Co.

Front

The court enabled the federal government to regulate commercial activities that occurred within states

Back

Habeas Corpus

Front

An order to produce an arrested person before a judge.

Back

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

Front

Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the Constitution implicitly guarantees citizens' right to privacy.

Back

Reserved Powers (10th Amendment)

Front

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Back

Jones v. Mayer (1968)

Front

Supreme Court Case which prohibits racial discrimination in any real estate transaction (residential or commercial)

Back

Loving v. Virginia (1967)

Front

invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage

Back

Title IX of Education Act of 1972

Front

Prohibited gender discrimination in federally subsidized education programs

Back

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Front

The U.S. Supreme Court established its own authority to rule on the constitutionality of laws, a process called judicial review. Similar to how the president has veto power on a law, this court case made it possible for the judicial branch to veto things as well.

Back

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

Front

A 2010 landmark Supreme Court case that ruled that individuals, corporations, and unions could donate unlimited amounts of money to groups that make independent political expenditures.

Back

United States v. Lopez (1995)

Front

The national government's power under the commerce clause does not permit it to regulate matters not directly related to interstate commerce (in this case, banning firearms in a school zone)

Back

Chisolm v. Georgia (1793)

Front

Citizens of one state can sue another state, overturned by the 11th amendment

Back

King v. Burwell (2015)

Front

Individuals using both the state-run and federally-run health insurance exchanges may receive health insurance subsidies from the federal government.

Back

Baerh v. Lewn

Front

A Hawaii Supreme Court asserted that the state's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, a number of states became worried that they would then have to recognize these marriages.

Back

Voting Rights Act of 1965

Front

a law designed to help end formal and informal barriers to African-American suffrage

Back

United States v. Windsor (2013)

Front

Struck down the federal Defense of Marriage of Marriage Act's (DOMA) restrictions of marriage rights to only heterosexual couples as unconstitutional violation of the 5th amendment due process clause; same sex married couples now receive federal benefits

Back

Browder v. Gayle (1956)

Front

Court ruled that segregation on buses was unconstitutional

Back

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Front

Ordered states to provide lawyers for those unable to afford them in criminal proceedings. Warren Court's judicial activism in criminal rights.

Back

Miller v. Johnson

Front

1995 SuCo: Racial gerrymandering violates the equal protection clause.

Back

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Front

outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin

Back

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Front

forbids discrimination in all areas of the employment relationship

Back