Supreme Court Decisions

HideShow resource information
UC v. Bakke (1978)
Affirmative Action (5-4) banning quotas in admissions process but allowed race to be factor in admissions to meet diversity (a good this). AA could only be used to further diversity within the nation.
1 of 21
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg (1971)
Affirmative Action (9-0) demanding rapid end to de facto segregation in Education. Allowed bussing to achieve this.
2 of 21
Adarand Constructors v. Pena (1995)
Affirmative Action (5-4): against AA, striking down federal govt AA programme. Dept of Transport gave bonuses to contractors if they hired sub-contractors that employed minorities. Challenged by firm in colorado which lost out in bid for work. Justice O'C
3 of 21
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)
Affirmative Action (6-3): ruled Uni of Michigan's admissions process too 'mechanistic' and ruled in unconstitutional. A-As, Hispanics and Native Americans given automatic 20 points in admissions
4 of 21
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
Affirmative Action (5-4): ruled that Uni of Mich's Law School could use race as part of an overall admissions process but must be alongside other factors. Justice O'Connor: AA should not be necessary in 25 years
5 of 21
Parents of Community Schools v. Seattle (2007)
Affirmative Action (5-4): Bussing students to schools to make them more representative is unconstitutional. NB. a conservative ruling as some liberals argued it over-turned Brown v. Board, allowing segregation.
6 of 21
Ricci v. DeStefano (2009)
Affirmative Action (5-4): Firefighters alleging that New Haven, Connecticut, discriminated against them with regard to promotions. Some A-A failed promotion test, others didn't so non of them got promotions. NH's ignorance of results violated CRA 1964
7 of 21
Fisher v. Texas (2013)
Affirmative Action (7-1): White woman rejected from Texas University, although minorities with worse credentials had been accepted. AA survived in theory but in practice it would be far harder to implement. AA only constitutional if "narrowly tailored"
8 of 21
Schuette v. Coalition to Defend AA/Bahm (2014)
Affirmative Action (6-2): questioned whether Michigan violated Equal Protection Clause of 14th Am by issuing ban on race- and sex-based discrimination on uni admissions.
9 of 21
Schuette v. Coalition to Defend AA/Bahm (2014) - Sixth Circuit 2012
Michigan ban of 2006 was unconstitutional. Sixth Circuit reversed and the state ban upheld. Upheld principle of direct democracy (so not role of SC to overturn as not elected). H/E black population small and .: duty of SC to protect minority rights
10 of 21
US v. Lopez (1995)
New Federalism (5-4): Commerce Clause of the Constitution doesn't give Congress the power to prohibit the mere possession of a gun (Gun-Free Schools Zone Act 1990)
11 of 21
Oregon v. Mitchell (1970)
Cooperative Federalism (5-4): Congress could set voter age for federal elections but not for state elections
12 of 21
Shelby County v. Holder
Race and Voting (5-4): Invalidating Section 4 of Voting Rights Act freeing 9 states (mostly South) to change their election laws without advance federal approval. Court divided along ideological lines
13 of 21
Dred Scott v. Sanford
Dred Scott, a slave, declared himself free in the North. Sandford tried to take him back to South as slave. Appealed to SC but rejected as no right to appeal as he wasn't a US citizen
14 of 21
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Separate but Equal legalized. De jure segregation
15 of 21
Brown v. Board of Education
strikes down Plessy v. Ferguson
16 of 21
Buckley v. Valeo (1976)
Campaign finance legislation shouldn't limit what a candidate can spend own money on
17 of 21
Citizens United v. FEC (2010)
Allows corporations and unions to use general treasuries to pay for political advertisements that call for election/defeat of a candidate
18 of 21
SpeechNow.org v. FEC (2010)
unconstitutional to impose contribution limit on groups whose sole purpose was funding independent expenditures
19 of 21
McCutcheon v. FEC (2014)
SC struck down overall donation limit but kept in place limit on how much someone could donate to an individual or PAC. No limit on how many PACs they donate to.
20 of 21
Shaw v. Reno (1993)
ruled racial redistricting violates Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment
21 of 21

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Affirmative Action (9-0) demanding rapid end to de facto segregation in Education. Allowed bussing to achieve this.

Back

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg (1971)

Card 3

Front

Affirmative Action (5-4): against AA, striking down federal govt AA programme. Dept of Transport gave bonuses to contractors if they hired sub-contractors that employed minorities. Challenged by firm in colorado which lost out in bid for work. Justice O'C

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

Affirmative Action (6-3): ruled Uni of Michigan's admissions process too 'mechanistic' and ruled in unconstitutional. A-As, Hispanics and Native Americans given automatic 20 points in admissions

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

Affirmative Action (5-4): ruled that Uni of Mich's Law School could use race as part of an overall admissions process but must be alongside other factors. Justice O'Connor: AA should not be necessary in 25 years

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Government & Politics resources:

See all Government & Politics resources »See all US Race and Immigration resources »