100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
AP Gov Exam Required SCOTUS Cases (rated 100% correct) $9.99   Add to cart

Exam (elaborations)

AP Gov Exam Required SCOTUS Cases (rated 100% correct)

 0 view  0 purchase
  • Course
  • Government course
  • Institution
  • Government Course

AP Gov Exam Required SCOTUS Cases (rated 100% correct)

Preview 1 out of 2  pages

  • October 4, 2024
  • 2
  • 2024/2025
  • Exam (elaborations)
  • Questions & answers
  • Government course
  • Government course
avatar-seller
Professorkaylee
AP Gov Exam Required SCOTUS Cases
(rated 100% correct)

Marbury v. Madison (1803) ANS -Established the principle of judicial review empowering the Supreme
Court to nullify an act of the legislative or executive branch that violates the Constitution



McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) ANS -In striking down Maryland's tax on the National Bank, the holding
established supremacy of the U.S. Constitution and federal laws over state laws. Often referenced in
regards to strengthening the implied powers of the federal government.



Schenck v. United States (1919) ANS -Speech creating a "clear and present danger" to national security
or public safety is not protected by the First Amendment



Brown v. Board of Education (1954) ANS -Race-based school segregation violates the equal protection
clause. Overturned Plessy v. Ferguson



Baker v. Carr (1961) ANS -Decided that redistricting issues present justiciable questions, thus enabling
federal courts to intervene and to decide redistricting cases. The defendants unsuccessfully argued that
redistricting of legislative districts is a "political question", and hence not a question that may be
resolved by federal courts. "One person, one vote."



Engel v. Vitale (1962) ANS -School sponsored prayer and bible readings violates the establishment clause
because students feel compelled to participate even if they are not religious or Christian.



Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) ANS -Guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent (and
subsequently everyone) in a state felony case (Incorporation)



Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) ANS -Preemptively banning
students from wearing black armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War was deemed
unconstitutional

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Professorkaylee. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $9.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

77254 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$9.99
  • (0)
  Add to cart