Extra Credit for Students

7 comments:
Selene said...
Baker vs. Carr (1962)
Facts:
1901 apportionment act
population went from 500,000 to 2million
shifted rural areas to city areas

Issue:
Did the 1901 apportionment act violate the constitutional rights?

Arguments:
1. Baker asked US district courts to declare 1901 apportionment act unconstitutional. It violated equal protection, 14th Amendment, by debasing.
2. Court dismissed Baker's case. Apportionment was responsibility of State legislature, not jurisdiction.

Decision:
Allowed federal courts to have jurisdiction in an apportionment case.

March 20, 2011 12:59 PM
Yesenia L. said...
United States vs. Nixon(1974)

Facts:
Nixon and the White House Staff had been implicated in the cover-up break-in of the Watergate building.

Issue:
Not wanting to release the taped conversations between President Nixon and the White House Staff.

Arguments:
The rule was that the president was required to release the taped conversations.

Decision:
Allowed for executive privilege, but not in criminal cases, "Even the President is not above the law," Watergates.

March 20, 2011 8:13 PM
Sandra Vasquez said...
Wesberry vs Sanders (1964)

Facts:
-The 5th distirct had two to three times the population of other Georgia districts

Issue:
-What the basis on which legislative districts were to be judged as meeting constituional standards

Arguments:
-The largerdistrict made Wesberry's vote worth less than some other Georgian citizen who have substantially smaller populated districts

Decision:
-Georgia's districting statue didn't violate Article I, Section2
-Ordered House districts to be as near equal in population

March 20, 2011 9:01 PM
Jennifer :) said...
Texas vs. Johnson (1989)

Facts:
-Dallas, Texas, 1984
-Protesting certain policies of Ronald Reagan, marched throughout the city and burned the flag in front of Dallas City Hall

Issue:
-Does burning the American Flag during a protest demonstration represent "expressive conduct," which is protected under the First Amendment?

Argument:
-Texas: He intentionally desecrated a national flag; to protect the American Flag as a symbol of unity and to prevent a breach of peace
-Johnson: Action to be a form of "symbolic speech" which is protected under the first amendment of the US Constitution.

Decision:
-Supreme court ruled that Johnson's First Amendment protections outweighed the arguments offered by the state of Texas (6-2 vote); his actions were a form of "symbolic speech"

March 20, 2011 10:20 PM
Eddie Meza said...
Lawrence vs. Texas (2003)

Facts:John Geddes Lawrence & Tyron Garner a homosexual couple were arrested between 10:30 and 11 p.m. on September 17, 1998 by officer Joseph Quinn. Arrests stemmed from a false report of a "weapons disturbance" in their home, the neighbor, partner of Garner, admitted the false report.

Issue: Homosexual sodomy is a widely and historically condemned practice. There was an anti-sodomy law in Texas which targeted homosexuals. Sexual relations are a personal/private matter.

Argument:If married couples are allowed to commit sodomy without such persecution then homosexuals should have an equal right. No matter the race, gender or orientation none should determine whether a person has to follow such a law, all must be treated equal. Sexual encounters are a personal and private matter in which the law should not be involved as long as it is not publicly displayed.

Decision:The Supreme Court voted 6–3 to strike down the Texas anti-sodomy law, with five of the justices holding that it violated due process guarantees, and a sixth justice found that it violated equal protection guarantees.

March 21, 2011 12:01 AM
Jackie Alcala said...
Abington school district vs Schempp 1963

Facts:
-schempp family was unitarians
-pennsylvania law required that at least 10 verses from bible should be read

Issue:
Whether the 1st amendment prohibition of governmental support of establishment of religion was violated

Arguments:
-schempps: unitarians don't believe that bible is always intelligble
-violated their rights under the free exercise clause of 1st amendment

Decision:
-8 to 1 decision that the practices at issue & laws requiring them are unconstitutional under establishment clause
-civil and religion should be taught separate

March 21, 2011 12:05 AM
Mr. Barclay said...
Thanks to those students who completed the assignment, even to those not in 5th period. Extra credit will be given to each of you-15 points.

March 21, 2011 7:47 PM