1
Q
what is affirmative action
A
actions aimed at providing equal opportunities for individuals from historically disadvantaged or underrepresented groups
2
Q
define racial equllity + teh deate around it
A
- Racial equality refers to the principle and goal of treating individuals of all races and ethnicities with fairness, justice, and equal opportunitie.
- the deabte is to what extent there needs to be afirmative action to chaive this
3
Q
waht are consitutinal rights
A
Constitutional rights are the liberties granted to individuals by a country’s constitution. These rights are considered inherent and above all else
4
Q
what is a swing justice
A
A Swing Justice refers to a member of the United States Supreme Court who does not consistently align with either the liberal or conservative factions of the Court
5
Q
what is a constructionalsit view of the consitution
A
- interprets the Constitution based on its literal meanign without room for interpritation and that this is possible.
- there can be stricked and loose construtionalsit and originalsits and constructionalsit are often united
6
Q
what is an originaist view of the consitution
A
interpriting the consitutionbased on its original meaning at the time of its adoption and intended by the framers
7
Q
defien public policy
A
Public policy refers to the decisions, actions, and plans implemented by governments and other authoritative bodies to address societal issues
8
Q
what it it calle dif you belive that teh consitution’s interpretation should consider the current values, needs, and circumstances of society
A
- this is teh idea of a living consitution
9
Q
what is judicial review
A
Judicial review is the power of the courts to review and determine the constitutionality of laws, regulations, executive actions, and government decisions ( i they are within the consitutional frame work )
10
Q
what is a liberal justice
A
- Liberal justices tend to support a broad interpretation of the Constitution, emphasizing individual rights and liberties, equal protection, and social justice
- basiclly much more likly to have a living conitution view
11
Q
whats is a conservtive justcie
A
- conservative or traditionalist views on constitutional
- more lilly to take a constructionalsit/originallyst view
12
Q
whast the idea of an imperial judicary
A
- a judicary ercising excessive power or overstepping its constitutional role
13
Q
what is judical activism + what is it an exaple of
A
- when a judges inteprites/applies a law in a way that goes beyond the original intent of the Constitution
- an imperial judicary
14
Q
what is judicial restraignt
A
- Judicial restraint refers to the approach taken by judges to limit their own power and defer to the decisions of the elected branches of government, such as the legislature and the executive, whenever possible. It involves a more limited role of the judiciary in interpreting and applying the law, with a focus on strict adherence to the text and original intent of the Constitution.
1. however Chief Justice John Roberts on teh AHA was both judicial restraint and judical activism.
15
Q
what is “stare decisis”
A
Latin term that translates to “to stand by things decided.” It is a legal doctrine that refers to the principle of following established precedent or previously decided cases when making decisions in current or future cases. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, courts are generally expected to adhere to the rulings and interpretations made in earlier cases
OR OF HIGHER COURTS
16
Q
what is teh idea of teh politisistion of teh judicary
A
The idea of the politicization of the judiciary refers to the perception or concern that judges or judicial decisions are influenced by political considerations rather than being solely based on legal analysis and interpretation. this can either be though a lack of neutrllity or inderpendence.
17
Q
what steh operite to the defendant
A
the plaintiff
* The plaintiff is the party who initiates a lawsuit
18
Q
what artical is the judicary
A
3
19
Q
how was thesupream court created
A
- teh federal judicary act 1789 alsmot dirrectly after the consitution was created
- this is beaue the consitution left the structure of the courts up to congress ( this included creating federal courts and the numbre of judges on teh courts)
- the act called for there to be a cheif justice and assosiate justice
- created district courts bellow, avove this appellate courts
- ( the supream court is teh higehst appelete court)
20
Q
what are the two levels of supream court justcies
A
- assosiate Justcie
- cheif justice- presides over but no aditonal powers
21
Q
is the supream court overtly mentioned in the conitution
A
yes “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court”
22
Q
whats Original jurisdiction + whats unque about SCOTUS interms of this
A
- Original jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear a case for the first time
- it is both an appelate court and has Original jurisdiction in some cases
23
Q
when does the supream court have Original jurisdiction
A
- Cases involving disputes between two or more states
- Cases affecting forign diplomats
24
Q
what are the enumerate dpowers of teh supream court
A
- Supreme Court as the highest judicial authority in the United States
- This section outlines the jurisdiction of the federal courts. It specifies the types of cases that fall under the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary, including cases involving the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, treaties, and disputes between states. It also grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in cases affecting forign diplomat and cases invoving a state as a party. ( most cases where a state is a party do not go straight to the Supreme Court
- (comon law- not implied but also not enumerated)
25
what are the implied pwers of the suprea court
* Judicial Review: The power of judicial review is an implied power of the Supreme Court, which allows it to review the constitutionality of laws and government actions. This power was established in the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison (1803) and is considered a fundamental aspect of the Court's authority. - this also applied to state legislatures in Fletcher v. Peck in 1810
* setting Precedent: The Supreme Court's power to establish legal precedent is an implied power. Precedent refers to the principle that previous court decisions should be followed in subsequent similar cases, providing stability and consistency in the interpretation and application of the law. - ( as teh highet scourt i the land)
* Interpreting the Constitution: ( madison vs mamsbury)
* acting as a checks and Balancing agegent for the other Branches of Government
26
what are the primary roles of the supream court
* jucical review: desiding the cosnitutionallity of law
* Interpreting the consitution
* setting legal presidnets
* Safeguarding Individual rights
* finally Resolving Legal Disputes
* acting as a checks and Balancing agegent for the other Branches of Government
27
why is the supream court considered inderpendent ( main reason )
* its roel is set out in the speration of powers in the cosnitution, no other braches of governemtn are above it or can take its powers away
28
what was the isgnificance of madison vs masbury to the supream court
* established the princiapl of judical review of federal gov
* In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court was faced with the question of whether it had the authority to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional.
* 1803
29
what was the significanc eof fletcher vs peck to the suprea court and when did it occure
* 1810
* Fletcher v. Peck is a significant Supreme Court case decided in 1810 that established the principle of judicial review of state laws
30
lsit all the points that makes the supream court inderpendent
* justices appointed for life
* fixed salleries whiel in office
* speration of powers
* (ABA ratings)
31
evaluate the vire that teh supream court is inderpendent just points and exples
**congressional powers**
* fixed salleries
1. As of 2021, the salary for an associate justice of the Supreme Court is $255,000 per year. These are determined by congress but remainset thought their tenure
* Congressional Legislation and conaitutional amendments
1. congress has the power to legislate aginst teh courts desions : Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993. This law was passed by Congress in response to the Court's decision in Employment Division v. Smith (1990), which established a new standard for evaluating the constitutionality of laws restricting religious practices. The RFRA restored a stricter standard for evaluating such laws, essentially overturning the Court's ruling. teh supream courts rulign would have making it more difficult for individuals to challenge laws that placed burdens on their religious beliefs and practices.
**appointments**
* in debted to presient and congress men who appointed them
* perminace on the court
1. once appointed has been cofirmed it cnaot be repealed
2. clarence thomas 32 years
3. most serve till they die or retire - rush bader ginsburge died after 27 years of sevrise
**consitutional speration fo powers**
* seperate enumerated powers
1. artical 3 higehst court in the land and interperte teh consiution
2. maison vs mamasbury juducial review congres and president
3. fletcher vs peck - judicila review of the states
* impeachement
1. never happened
2. ( 15 federal judges: thomas porteous 2010
3. almost abe fortas in 1968 for montry reasons
32
what are incidentally burdened religious practices
Incidentally burdened religious practices refer to situations where a law or government action has the effect of placing blam on an individual's religious beliefs or practices,
33
other than bret kavenar who lese has sexsual harrasment agligations gaist them
clarrence thomas 1991
34
what factors influence a preisdents choise of nomiation of a supream court justce + e.g
* age
1. kentanji brown 51
* ideological leaning
1. decomrts wll paoint more liber justices vs republican more consrvtiev
2. when trump first appointed neil gorsuch and brett kavear they were seen to be very right wing and there was a big public outcry
* Legal Experience and Qualifications
1. ABA rating
2. bush 2005 harriet miers
3. robbert bork 1987 regan
* Diversity and Representation
1. amy coney barret to replace ruth bader ginsburge ( cosnensus she aught to be a woman)
2. kentanji brown ajckson being a young qualifiedback female likly playe da role in her appointment by biden in 2022
* Confirmation Prospects
1. obama tried to appoint Merrick Garland in 2016, pickign a more centrist candidate to try get him passed though a republican controled senate
35
who were trumps upream court appointments
* Neil Gorsuch
* brett Kavanaugh
* amy coney barret
36
evaluate teh appointment proces of supreame court judges
**into**- an ideal apointment process would produce a neutral and inderpendent court with judjes selcted for their meritocracy and knowlege of the law.
* **Checks and balances**
* both the two other branches of governemtn are invoved in the appointment process.This means that the president has to amke sessible nominations inoder to have a judge be confirmed by the senate.
1. robber bork 1987 regan - conserns in the hearing over his past actions and judicial phillosophy being to rigth wing - 42 in favour 58 against - 2 republican siwng votes
* **become more partizan**
* the checsk and ballences system also has downsides. for instance the sneate can chose not to vote on a presidnets nomination if they dont lie the canidate
1. for exaple obama appointed a liberal justice ( meric garland in 2016) but the republican nontroeld senate chose to wind down the clock till the election hoping for a new apointment under a republicna priminister.
* this is significant as it shows how the appointment process can be very partizan ( as aposed to neutral) and judges are more confirmed based on thire politcal views rateh rthan merit
* furthermore the votes have just generally becoem more partzan, undermong the idea of judical nutrallity
1. ruth ader ginsburge in 1996- 96-3 vs teh appointments for bretkaven wich was esentually a party ;ines vote despite a mess of a hearing and sexual asult aligations agist him, ( same party lines with kentanji brown jackson)
1
* **polictisisation of the process**
* it is also true that the president is more lily to appoint justices taht align with their particular ideology
1. when trump appointed neil gorsuch in 2017 and then brett kavenar in 2018 gorsuch in particular as known for his sicked constructionalsit view of the consitution
* this can occure more to an extree if there is a united governemt as a president knows that his party will back them where as the oposition may not. tshi si san issue as its resukte din a more poltisised and politisised court lacking neutrallity ( and potencilly lacking inderpendence if a candidate were to feel indeted to a politician.
* **cant recall appointments**
* supream court justices cant be recalled by the preisdent or the senate once an appoitment has beebn confimed
1. ruth bader ginsburge 27 years before death and clarense thomas current cheif 32 yesrs so far
* this mens that the posses ensures jusdiaial inderpendence once they judges are on the court
2
* **judjes with expertise and evidence**
* hearings and ABA score ( well quallified, quallified, not qullified)
1. Well Qualified - kentanji brown jackson
2. this becam e significnat in the case of harriet miners where it became clear she would not pass as she had no prior expirence ( bush 2005). this lead to her enventual withdrawal of her nomination
* this ensures a meritocratic process
* howevr: ABA sems to rank conservtiev jusges worse
* also hearings sem to beineffective: e.g both kavenargh and thomas had sexual asult/ ahrrasemnt aligations.
* **lack of meritocray in selction ( other slectionrequirments)**
* there are alot of factors tht paly a roel in the presidents appointment that arent jsut relate dto merit. for exapel, young judges are favoured as they will have a longer carea on the bench, also liberal presidnts are quite alot more likly to appoint more diverity to teh bech
1. kentanji brown jackson ( 51 when appointed), poteniclly older justices bettwer qullified
* however one could argue its importnt to have a represntive judiary refectignt hat of the us poulation to avoid bias
3
**concusion:** less effective now as becoem more partzan and as congress and president become polarised
37
whos cheif justice
**John Robberts **
38
list all the consrvtive justices ( in order of conservtiveness)
* clarence thomas
* Alito
* gorsuch
* koney barret
* kavenaugh
* john robbers
| there are 6
39
whats another key differnce between liberal and conservtive justices
* liberal - federl gov
* conservtiev - states rights
40
ist all the liberal justices ( in order of liberalness)
* sonya sotomayor
* brown jackson
* alena keygan
| there are three
41
evaluate the impact of teh supream court on public policy ( in the US)
* **Impact of Supreme Court decisions on economic issues**
1. NFIB v. Sebelius (2012) - (judicial activism)
1. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010): This landmark case ruled that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections could not be limited under the First Amendment's free speech protection
* **limited by consitutional cosntrints**
* supream court should be inteprtitng not making now laws - ( esutully therefor they dont have power but are upholding the power of the consitution)
1. madison vs masburry and fletcher vs peck
1
* **Impact of Supreme Court decisions on social issues**
2. fletcher vs peck 1810= state level judicial review
3. Brown v. Board of Education:is a landmark Supreme Court case that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for Black and white students unconstitutional
4. obigerfell vs hodges: Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) is a landmark Supreme Court case that held that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples under the Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment
* **limited by stare decisis and judicial restraignt**
* Fisher v. University of Texa upholding grutter vs bollinger 2003 upholding university of claifornia vs bakke 1977.
* not roe vs wade 1973 and then dobbes vs jackson 2022 when court overuled its prevsious dession.
* also not brown vs bord of eduction and plessly vs ferguson
3
* **checks on supream court limit their power of public policy**
* legislate agianst
2. Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in 1993. This law was enacted in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Employment Division v. Smith (1990), which altered the standard for evaluating the constitutionality of laws burdening religious practices.
* congres also have teh abillity to propose to amend teh cosnitution with 2/3 majoity in both chamers if they disagree with judicial review - e.g preposed amendment of "People's Rig hts Amendment" after citozens united vs federal elections comission struc doen certain provisons of the mcCain feingold act 2003. ( however failed)
**failer impeachemtn and inabillity to overide dessions ( failers of checks and ballences**
* no veto or overide liek with the president and congress. a supream court dession is final unless amended th econ witch is coplex and ahrd.
* checks such as impeachment for justices affetcing public policy in untowards way has never actully been acgives
2. Abe Fortas In 1968, Fortas faced controversy and calls for impeachment due to his involvement with a private foundation and his alleged financial improprieties. Amid the controversy, an impeachment inquiry was initiated against Fortas in the U.S. Senate in 1969. However, before the impeachment proceedings could advance, Fortas resigned.
3. one ferder judge ( Thomas Porteous ) has been impeached and thats it. ( this was for lying in court)
4. clarence thomas has confirmed to e resiving donations for luxurary vacations from republican domors for yoear yet has not been impeahced - and has failed to discolse them + his wife took part in efforts to undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election. the wife bit isnt really rellivant but the doantions bit is as it means he was possibly shaping public polict is a way thats classified as judicial actibism, taking a more conservtive stace due to the domations. the echecks and ballences process failed to stop this
42
what is Brown v. Board of Education
(1954) is a landmark Supreme Court case that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for Black and white students unconstitutional ( under teh Fourteenth Amendment)
43
what is obigerfell vs hodges
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) is a landmark Supreme Court case that held that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples under the Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment
44
give an exaple of a judge almost being impeached
2. Abe Fortas In 1968, Fortas faced controversy and calls for impeachment due to his involvement with a private foundation and his alleged financial improprietiesAmid the controversy, an impeachment inquiry was initiated against Fortas in the U.S. Senate in 1969. However, before the impeachment proceedings could advance, Fortas resigned
45
what is judicaial activism
Judicial activism refers to an approach taken by judges or justices in which they interpret and apply the law in a manner that goes beyond strictly adhering to the original intent
46
list some resons a justice may take part in judicial activism + exaples of each
* their own political ideology seeping in
1. Brown v. Board of Education (1954): The landmark ruling that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students unconstitutional, overturning the "separate but equal" doctrine established by Plessy v. Ferguson.
2. dobbs vs jackson and roe vs wade ( both these are stare decisis)
* to uphold popular soveignty
1. NFIB v. sellubus (2012) - also judicial restrighnt
* the political zeigtgeist
1. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
* to avoid injustice in society with changing ideas of right and wrong ( living consitution)
1. Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
* to defer power to the elctd branches
1. robber NFBI v. sebelius
47
give two exampels of stare decisis not being upheld
* Brown v. Board of Education (1954): The landmark ruling that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students unconstitutional, overturning the "separate but equal" doctrine established by Plessy v. Ferguson.
* roe v. wade vs dobbs v. jackson
48
what is judicial restraint
an approach that emphasizes the limited role of the judiciary, oly interpreting and applying the law inorder to uphold the other two branches of governemt.
49
what is a scotus judge knwon as
a justice
50
what is the satement of judges wgho disgree with the majority called
**"dissent"** refers to a written opinion by a judge or justice who disagrees with the majority's decision in a
51
what is the ruling of a judge who agrees majority rule but for a differnt reason
concurrence
52
what is it called when a jusdge agrees soemwhat with a verdict but for a differnt reason
partial concurrence
53
why might judges engage in judicla restignt and give soem exaples
* they hold an originalist or sticked constutiinalist view on the consitution
1. United States v. Lopez (1995): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 exceeded Congress's power
2. District of Columbia v. Heller (2008): The Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for self-defense within their home
* they realise theyre position as unlected officials and do not want to challenge democrcy by makign consitutionally significnat dessions
1.NFIB v. Sebelius (2012)
54
what was the case called when judges shot down gun laws banning guns in schools
United States v. Lopez (1995)
55
whats the majorty rule of the jusdes reason called
majority rule ( opion)
( and then minority opion)
56
what comitee presides over the hearing of a SC justice
the senate judicary committee
57
what are the cristsisims of judicial activism vs judicial restrint - essayplan
* **restrignt not activism: lack of accountbaillity**
* Judicial activism can be perceived as undemocratic since judges are not elected officials and are not directly accountable to the public. Critics argue that judges should not have the power to impose their personal beliefs or agendas on society as the public have no countre mechnism to hold them accoutbale.
* **activism not restrignt: to uphold popular soveignty**
1. NFIB v. sellubus (2012) cheif justcie john Robbers enaged in a unique case of judicial activism and restrignt at teh same time. He wrote the majority opinion where he sided with liberal justices arging that the In the ruling, the Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), including its individual mandate provision, which required individuals to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty. The Court's decision rested on the interpretation of the individual mandate as a tax rather than a penalty, concluding that Congress had the power to impose taxes under the Taxing Clause of the Constitution.
* this was ignificnat as the AHA has massive public support and a democrtic madate as Obama had campeigned around it winning him office with a 53% of the popular vote, ( remarkably high)
2
* **restrignt not activism: imperial court / Overreach of Judicial Power**
* Critics argue that judicial activism allows judges to go beyond their proper role as intended by the consitution of interpreting and applying the law and instead make policy decisions. This is seen also seen as an encroachment on the legislative branch's authority and therefore a challenge to the speration of powers.
* **activism not restrignt: achive justice with changing ideas of what is right and wrong**
* peopel argue judges have to engage in some judicial activism an dinterprete the cosnitution as a living consitution inorder to truely achive justice as the original framer wrote it in a very differnt time. For exaple slavery was till legal.
1. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015
1. Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
2. if they dont = cases like United States v. Lopez (1995)
3
**restrignt not activism: undermined judicial neutrallity**
* activist judges may be influenced by personal or ideological biases in their decision-making. They argue that when judges use their power to advance specific social or political agendas, it undermines the impartiality and fairness of the judicial system.
1. roe v. wade vs dobbs v. jackson -
* chnaing preidencts and treatemnt is cofnusing and unfiar, undermined rights of individuals
**activism not restrignt: relfect changing politicla zrigiest**
1. Brown v. Board of Education (1954) that overturned Plessy v. Ferguson
* relfects chnaing public opion and protected right even when society was polirised.
58
explain Grutter v. Bollinger
Grutter v. Bollinger was a landmark case decided by the United States Supreme Court in 2003. The case addressed the issue of affirmative action in higher education admissions. The University of Michigan Law School had an affirmative action policy that considered race as one of many factors in the admissions process, this was allowed as it was not considered disriminatory under the 14th amendment as it was one of many fctors looked at.
59
list some key rights protected by the consitution
Freedom of speech: The First Amendment guarantees the right to freedom of speech, allowing individuals to express their opinions and ideas without government interference.
Freedom of religion: The First Amendment also protects the freedom of religion, ensuring that individuals have the right to practice their chosen religion or no religion at all.
Freedom of the press: The First Amendment safeguards the freedom of the press, allowing journalists and media organizations to report news and express opinions without censorship or undue government control.
Right to peaceful assembly: The First Amendment protects the right to peacefully assemble and protest, allowing individuals to gather and express their grievances.
Right to bear arms: The Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, subject to reasonable regulations imposed by the government.
Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures: The Fourth Amendment guards against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement. It requires that warrants be issued based on probable cause and describes the conditions under which searches and seizures are lawful.
Right to a fair trial: The Sixth Amendment guarantees several rights in criminal proceedings, including the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to legal counsel, and the right to confront witnesses.
Protection against cruel and unusual punishment: The Eighth Amendment prohibits the imposition of cruel and unusual punishment and protects against excessive bail or fines.
Equal protection under the law: The Fourteenth Amendment ensures equal protection of the laws to all individuals, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or other protected characteristics.
60
list some cases where rights have been upheld by the supream court
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): The Court held that racial segregation in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, leading to the desegregation of public schools.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966): The Court established the Miranda rights, requiring law enforcement to inform suspects of their rights against self-incrimination and to have an attorney present during police interrogations. - protecting individual
Roe v. Wade (1973): The Court recognized a woman's constitutional right to have an abortion under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, establishing legal protections for reproductive rights.
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015): The Court held that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.
New York Times v. United States (1971): The Court upheld the freedom of the press, ruling that the government cannot prevent newspapers from publishing classified information, affirming the importance of the First Amendment.
61
give some examples of when rights protection wasnt a good thing or the supream court challeneged rights etc.
**challeneged other rights**
* Shelby County v. Holder (2013): The Court struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, weakening protections against racial discrimination in voting practices, which some argue hindered the full exercise of voting right
* Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018): The Court ruled in favor of a bakery owner who refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, citing religious objections. The decision raised questions about the balance between LGBTQ+ rights and religious freedom
**negtive**
* Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010): The Court ruled that corporations and unions have the right to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, leading to concerns about the influence of money in politics and potential dilution of the voice of individual voters.
* United States v. Lopez (1995) ( guns inschools
62
give a UK rights protetcion case and US one witch are very simillar
"Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission" in the US Supreme Court is known as "Lee v. Ashers Baking Company Ltd" in the UK Supreme Court
63
what have been the specific racial righst campeigns in US history ?
* Civil Rights Movement (1950s-1960s)
* BLM movemnt 2013 (2021 recindles) - now
64
what is supream court packing
* The term "Supreme Court packing plan" can also be used more broadly to refer to any proposal to alter the size or composition of the Supreme Court for political purposes - Not allowed till
* The term "Supreme Court packing plan" can also be used more broadly to refer to any proposal to alter the size or composition of the Supreme Court for political purposes
* there is a potncial for corruption here but its not occures since 1869
65
give a case of conservtive judicial activism vs liberal
* **liberal**- obergefell vs hodges (2015)
* **conservtive**- Citizens united vs Fec (2010) - overturned some of McCain-Feingold
66
give a case of conservtive judicial restrignt conservatiev vs liberal
* **liberal**- Glossip v. Gross
* **Conservtiev**- Whole Womas health vs hellerstedt before dobbes vs jackson ( liberal justices joined by john robberts) - abortion case
67
give an exple of a truly centrist judge and when they have voted this way
Whole Womas health vs hellerstedt before dobbes vs jackson ( liberal justices joined by john robberts)- abortion case
68
explain Glossip v. Gross
( 2015 liberla court) In Glossip v. Gross, the Court considered whether the use of a sedative called midazolam in lethal injections violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The petitioners argued that midazolam did not effectively render the inmates unconscious, leading to a risk of severe pain and suffering during the execution process.
The Court ultimately upheld the use of midazolam as a constitutional method of execution
69
what is teh ABA
the ameican bar assosition
70
what % of the us is non white ( not including hispanics)
40%
71
list some landmark moments in relation to racial based rights
* 1861-65 is the cival war leadign to the end of slavery
* 1865 the 13 amendment consitutionally bans slavery
* 1868 the 14 amendment garentees equal rights for all citozens
* 1870 the 15th amendment prohibits the right to vote being denies on the basis of race
* 1896 - plessy vs ferguson allows for segregation of facillites as long as they are 'seperte but equal'
* 1948 - desegregation of teh army plessy vs ferguson and the seperate but equal ending desegrgaton in schools
* 1950s-60s cival rights movemnt
* 1954 - Brown vs the board of eduction overules
* the March on Washington 250,000 1963
* 1964 the cival rights act is passed prohibiting discrimination of the basis of race and ending segregation
* 1967 Loving v. Virginia: The Court struck down laws banning interracial marriage, ruling that such laws violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and the fundamental right to marry
* 1978 claifornia vs bakke - The Court held that the use of racial quotas in admissions was unconstitutional However, it also recognized that universities could consider race as one factor among many in their admissions decisions to achieve a diverse student body
* 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger upheld that universities could consider race as one factor among many in their admissions decisions
* Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2013, 2016): In a series of decisions, the Court reaffirmed the constitutionality of affirmative action in college admissions, while emphasizing the importance of narrowly tailored policies and the ongoing need for **periodic review**
72
what does GOP stand for ?
"Grand Old Party," which is a nickname for the Republican Party
73
what are the **methods** in achiveing change in reation to rac ebased rights / **racal rights campeigns**( list)
* legal action
* mass demostrations and dirrect action
* media and social media
74
evaluate the **methods** in achiveing change in reation to rac ebased rights / **racal rights campeigns**
1
* **legal action**
* beinging cases before the supream court can highlight rights that were fialing to b agnologed in society acording to the cosnitution
1. Brown v. Board of Education (1954): The NAACP's Legal Defense and Educational Fund represented the plaintiffs in this landmark case that challenged racial segregation in public schools. thi swas incredibely succesful ending segregation in schools
* **However can fail**
1. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896): In this case, Homer Plessy, an African American, challenged a Louisiana law that required racial segregation on trains. Plessy argued that the law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the law, establishing the "separate but equal" doctrine. This ruling allowed for racial segregation to continue across various public facilities, perpetuating racial discrimination for several decades.
2
* **mass demostrations and dirrect action**
1. he March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom 1963, 250,000 peopel - 1964 cival righst act
2. Voting Rights Act of 1965: This landmark legislation was a direct result of the civil rights movement and aimed to overcome barriers to African American voter registration and participation.
* **howver can fail**
One example of a mass demonstration or direct action that did not succeed in advancing the cause of civil rights was the Chicago Freedom Movement's campaign for open housing in the late 1960s. faced significant opposition and did not achieve its goal of ending racial discrimination in the housing market in Chicago
3.
* **media and social media**
* a form of digtal mass demostration
1. posting of black square and use of hashtags like BLM after the killing of george floyd at teh hands of a police officer. resulted in the 4 officers arrests and the idea of racism re-entring the public sphere after there being anidea of ending affirmative action etc.
**Howver: failed to invoke any other racial protection policies**
1. e.g. defund the police
2. Criminal justice reform: The movement highlighted the need for comprehensive criminal justice reform to address systemic issues such as mass incarceration, racial disparities in sentencing, and unfair treatment within the criminal justice system. This involved advocating for alternatives to incarceration, sentencing reform, ending mandatory minimum sentences, and addressing racial bias in the criminal justice system.
75
what is teh NAACP
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
76
if your talking about racial rights what are the three kwy topics you need to talk about
* voting rights
* affirmative action
* represenation
77
what has been the effectiveness of racial rights campaigns in terms of voting righst
**EFFECTIVE**
* **Voting Rights Act of 1965:** This landmark legislation was a direct result of the civil rights movement and aimed to overcome barriers to African American voter registration and participation. It prohibited discriminatory practices such as literacy tests and madates identification. The Voting Rights Act has been instrumental in protecting voting rights for minority communities.
**Ineffective**
**Shelby County v. Holder (2013): **In this Supreme Court case, the court **invalidated** a key provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states and jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination in voting to obtain federal approval before changing their voting laws. This decision has been seen as a setback to efforts to combat voter suppression and protect minority voting rights.
78
what has been the effectiveness of racial rights campaigns in terms of affirmative action
* University of California v. Bakke (1978) - didnt alow racial quotas but allowed afirmative action if one of many fcator s
* Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) - upheld airmative action if one of amy factors
* Fisher v. University of Texas(2016) - negtive
* currently SFFA is challenging the admissions programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina - asian ameican planctif argues tehre is racial based discrimiatiin agist aisn peopel wich is unfair when they have also been at a disdvage in society but that ll racial based "possitve discrimination" is unfair. - this is a result of fisher v univerity of texus witch argued affiemative action needed contunal review.
79
before taling about affirmarive action what shoudl you do
defien it
80
what has been the effectiveness of racial rights campaigns in terms of representaion
* Racial rights campaigns have also influenced public opinion and societal norms regarding representation. By highlighting the importance of diverse perspectives and experiences, these campaigns have helped shift the discourse around representation and fostered a greater emphasis on inclusivity and equal opportunity. This, in turn, has led to increased recognition of the need for diverse voices in decision-making processes.
1. congres is 23% non white most ever and has been incresing almost evry year since the tuen of the millenis
81
what re the affirmative action cases relating to the univerity of michagen
( both 2003)
* Grutter v. Bollinger
1. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, upheld the university's affirmative action program, ruling that it served a compelling interest in fostering diversity, which was deemed to contribute to the educational environment and the university's educational mission. The Court held that a **holistic review** of applicants, which includes race as a factor, was constitutional as long as it was narrowly tailored and did not involve strict quotas.
* Gratz v. Bollinger.
1. he Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that the university's undergraduate admissions policy violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it used a mechanical point system that gave a predetermined boost to applicants from underrepresented racial or ethnic groups, effectively creating a quota-like system.
82
what is Guantanamo Bay in the US simmilar to in the UK
belmarsh prison
83
give an exaple of teh uS supream court upholding rights in relation to Guantanamo Bay/ expalin in the final case
One notable case is **Boumediene v. Bush** (2008). This case dealt with the issue of whether detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility had the right to challenge their detention through habeas corpus petitions in U.S. courts. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, held that the detainees had a constitutional right to habeas corpus, meaning they had the right to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in U.S. federal courts.
The Boumediene decision had significant implications for the rights of Guantanamo detainees and the legal framework surrounding their detention. It established that Guantanamo detainees, as non-citizens held outside of U.S. sovereign territory, still had constitutional rights and access to the U.S. legal system
84
explain the significance of guantanamo bay in terms of failer of the sepertion of the brches, checks an ballences and righst protection
* there have been 4 supream court cases realting to the righst of prisoner sin guantanamo bay ( where forign terorist prisoners are held off US soil). Each time the US goverment found a way aroudn a supream court rulign that was esentully tring to grnat tehm a fair trial.
* this went on from 2004 - 2008 beginign with Rasul vs bush and ending with boumedieene v bush
* there are still detainees being held indefiently without trial. ( uS citozens)
85
what ideas come under reprisentaion relating to the hudicary
* votign rights
* affirmative action
86
why have teh us parties becoem more polorised
* Media and Information Environment:
* primaries and low turn out ( only the major parties
* Gerrymandering ensuring that more extreemist candidates are able to prevail and there is less of a need to apeal to teh masses / both ends / the middle ground of an elctorat e
87
what amendment allowed obigerfell vs hodges
the 14th
88
exaplian Miranda v. Arizona
Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark Supreme Court case in the United States that dealt with the issue of individuals' rights against self-incrimination during police interrogations. The case originated from the arrest of Ernesto Miranda, who was accused of kidnapping and rape in 1963.
significnat in terms of protection of individual righst
Darwin US Politics
flashcards
Decks in class (5)
# Cards
