Key Court Cases Quiz

Explanation
Baker v. Carr is a landmark Supreme Court case that established the principle of "one man, one vote." The case involved a challenge to Tennessee's legislative districts, which had not been redrawn in over 60 years and resulted in significant population disparities between districts. The Court ruled that these disparities violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that legislative districts must be drawn in a way that ensures equal representation for all citizens. This decision had a significant impact on redistricting practices across the United States and helped to ensure fair and equal representation for all voters.

Explanation
Texas v. Johnson is the correct answer because it was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1989 that struck down a Texas law that banned flag burning as a form of protest. The Court ruled that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment as a form of symbolic speech. This case established that the government cannot prohibit individuals from expressing their political views through flag desecration, even if it is considered offensive or disrespectful to the flag.

Explanation
In the case of Clinton v. New York, the Supreme Court struck down the use of line item veto. This means that the President's power to veto specific parts of a bill while approving the rest was deemed unconstitutional. The Court held that this violated the Presentment Clause of the Constitution, which outlines the process for passing legislation. The decision affirmed that the President must either approve or reject an entire bill as a whole, without the ability to selectively veto certain provisions.

Explanation
UC Regents v. Bakke is the correct answer because this Supreme Court case ruled against the use of strict quotas in university admissions. The case involved Allan Bakke, a white applicant who was denied admission to the University of California, Davis Medical School, despite having higher qualifications than some minority applicants who were admitted. The court held that while affirmative action programs were permissible, the use of racial quotas was unconstitutional. This decision established the principle that race could be considered as a factor in admissions, but strict quotas based solely on race were not allowed.

Explanation
Engle v. Vitale is the correct answer because it is the landmark Supreme Court case that declared state-sponsored prayer in public schools unconstitutional. In this case, the Court ruled that the recitation of a prayer composed by the New York State Board of Regents in public schools violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from establishing a religion. The decision set an important precedent in ensuring the separation of church and state in public education.

Explanation
Mapp v. Ohio is the correct answer because it was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1961 that established the exclusionary rule. This rule states that evidence obtained illegally by law enforcement cannot be used against a defendant in court. In the Mapp v. Ohio case, the Court ruled that evidence obtained during an illegal search and seizure was inadmissible in state courts, extending the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures to the states. This decision significantly impacted criminal procedure and safeguarded individuals' rights against unlawful searches and seizures.

Explanation
Marbury v. Madison established the concept of judicial review. In this landmark case, the Supreme Court asserted its power to review and invalidate laws or actions that are deemed unconstitutional. The decision made by Chief Justice John Marshall in 1803 set the precedent for the Court's authority to interpret the Constitution and declare acts of the legislative and executive branches as unconstitutional. This case solidified the Court's role as the final arbiter of the Constitution and significantly impacted the balance of power among the three branches of government.

Explanation
Planned Parenthood v. Casey is the correct answer because this landmark Supreme Court case, decided in 1992, established the "undo burden" standard for regulating abortions. The case upheld the essential holding of Roe v. Wade, which recognized a woman's constitutional right to have an abortion, but also allowed states to impose restrictions as long as they did not place an "undue burden" on a woman's right to choose. This ruling gave states more leeway in regulating abortions, leading to the development of various laws and regulations surrounding the procedure.

Explanation
Lemon v. Kurtzman is a landmark Supreme Court case that established a three-part test to determine if the establishment clause of the First Amendment has been violated. The test, known as the Lemon test, requires that a law or government action must have a secular purpose, its primary effect must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and it must not result in excessive entanglement between government and religion. This case is significant in shaping the interpretation of the establishment clause and providing guidelines for evaluating the constitutionality of laws related to religion.

Explanation
Griswald v. Connecticut is a landmark Supreme Court case that established the right to privacy as a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. In this case, the Court ruled that a Connecticut law prohibiting the use of contraceptives violated the right to privacy. The decision recognized that the Constitution protects individuals' rights to make personal decisions about their own bodies and intimate relationships without government interference. This ruling has had far-reaching implications for privacy rights in various contexts, including reproductive rights, same-sex relationships, and personal autonomy.

Explanation
Brown v. Board of Education is the correct answer because it was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1954 that declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional. The case involved a young African American girl, Linda Brown, who was denied admission to a white school in Topeka, Kansas. The Court's ruling stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal" and violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. This decision marked a significant turning point in the civil rights movement and paved the way for desegregation in schools across the United States.

Explanation
Gitlow v. New York is the correct answer because this landmark Supreme Court case established the precedent of applying the Bill of Rights to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involved the arrest and conviction of Benjamin Gitlow for distributing socialist literature, and the Court ruled that the First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech and press applied to the states as well. This decision expanded the reach of constitutional rights and set an important precedent for future cases involving the incorporation of the Bill of Rights.

Explanation
McCulloch v. Maryland is the correct answer because this landmark Supreme Court case established the principle of national supremacy. In this case, the Court ruled that the federal government had the power to create a national bank and that state governments could not interfere with or tax federal institutions. This decision solidified the authority of the federal government over the states and set a precedent for future cases involving the balance of power between the national and state governments.

Explanation
Gideon v. Wainright is the correct answer because it is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that established the right to counsel for an accused person. In this case, Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering a poolroom and was denied a lawyer due to his inability to afford one. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to counsel for all criminal defendants, even if they cannot afford one, ensuring fair trials and protecting the rights of the accused.

Explanation
Buckley v. Valeo is the correct answer because it was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1976 that established that campaign spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment. The case involved a challenge to the Federal Election Campaign Act, which placed limits on campaign contributions and expenditures. The Court ruled that while the government could regulate campaign finance to prevent corruption, it could not restrict the amount of money individuals or groups could spend on their own political campaigns. This decision has had a significant impact on the regulation of campaign finance in the United States.

Explanation
Lawrence v. Texas is the correct answer because this Supreme Court case in 2003 struck down a Texas law that criminalized consensual sexual activity between same-sex couples. The Court ruled that the law violated the right to privacy, which is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In this case, the Court recognized that adults have the right to engage in private, consensual sexual conduct without government interference, overturning previous precedent and affirming the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals.

Explanation
Kelo v. City of New London is the correct answer because this landmark Supreme Court case expanded the power of eminent domain, allowing cities to seize private property for economic development purposes. The court ruled that the city's plan to take private property and transfer it to a private developer qualified as a "public use" under the Fifth Amendment. This decision gave cities more flexibility in using eminent domain to promote economic growth and revitalization.

Explanation
Shaw v. Reno is the correct answer because it is a landmark Supreme Court case that banned gerrymandering based on race. In this case, the Court ruled that North Carolina's redistricting plan, which created a predominantly black district, was unconstitutional as it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court found that race was the predominant factor in the creation of the district, and it did not serve a compelling government interest. This decision set an important precedent in prohibiting racial gerrymandering in the United States.

Explanation
US v. Lopez is a Supreme Court case that limited congressional use of the commerce clause. In this case, the Court ruled that the Gun-Free School Zones Act exceeded Congress's power under the commerce clause because it did not have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. This decision marked a significant shift in the Court's interpretation of the commerce clause, narrowing Congress's authority to regulate activities that are not directly related to interstate commerce.

Explanation
Bush v. Gore used Amendment 14's equal protection to stop the Florida recount in the election of 2000. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the recount process in Florida was inconsistent and violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The court argued that the lack of consistent standards for recounting ballots across different counties meant that some votes were being treated differently than others, thus violating the principle of equal protection. As a result, the recount was halted, and George W. Bush was declared the winner of the election.