Judicial Power
Congress passes a law giving the President the power to review and overturn Supreme Court decisions. A legal challenge reaches the Court. Based on precedent, what would the Court likely say about this law?
The Court would likely strike down the law as unconstitutional, applying the principle of judicial review established in Marbury v. Madison (1803).
A state attempts to tax a federal agency operating within its borders, arguing that it has sovereignty over its own land and commerce. How might the Court respond?
The Court would likely rule the state cannot interfere with federal operations, citing federal supremacy and implied powers as established in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819).
A public school requires students to stand for a daily moment of “silent reflection,” but students say it feels like a religious exercise. How might the Court rule?
The Court would likely find this violates the Establishment Clause, applying the precedent from Engel v. Vitale (1962).
A school district says it can keep separate schools for students of different races as long as they’re “equal.” A lawsuit challenges this. How would the Court respond?
The Court would strike down the segregation policy as unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, as in Brown v. Board of Education (1954).
A new law bans labor unions and corporations from running political ads within 60 days of an election. An advocacy group challenges the law. What First Amendment precedent applies?
The Court would likely rule the ban unconstitutional, recognizing political spending as protected speech per Citizens United v. FEC (2010).
Congress passes a law making it a federal crime to carry a skateboard within 1,000 feet of any school. A student is arrested under this law, and the case challenges Congress’s authority. What precedent would apply?
The Court would likely find Congress overstepped its Commerce Clause authority, as it did in U.S. v. Lopez (1995).
A man is convicted of a felony in state court after being denied a lawyer due to lack of funds. He appeals, claiming his right to counsel was violated. How would the Court likely rule?
The Court would likely reverse the conviction, stating the Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to the states, as established in Gideon v. Wainwright (1963).
A state has not redrawn its legislative districts in 50 years, despite major population shifts. Citizens sue, claiming their votes are diluted. What precedent supports their case?
The Court would likely hear the case and support the plaintiffs, applying the “one person, one vote” principle from Baker v. Carr (1962).
A congressional redistricting map creates oddly shaped districts based entirely on race. Lawmakers argue it’s to ensure minority representation. What constitutional concern arises?
The Court would question whether race was the predominant factor, which could violate the Equal Protection Clause, as seen in Shaw v. Reno (1993).
A school suspends a student for wearing a T-shirt with a peace symbol to protest war. The student says it’s a form of political expression. Based on precedent, is the student protected?
Yes, the student’s symbolic speech is protected under the First Amendment, as established in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969).
A person distributes leaflets encouraging others to resist a new military draft, and is arrested under a national security law. What constitutional balance must the Court consider?
The Court would consider whether the speech poses a “clear and present danger,” as it did in Schenck v. United States (1919).
The federal government tries to stop a newspaper from publishing leaked documents about military actions. The publisher argues this violates freedom of the press. What precedent applies?
The Court would likely prevent prior restraint and rule for the newspaper, as it did in New York Times Co. v. United States (1971).
A city bans all handgun ownership, even for self-defense in the home. A resident sues, arguing the Second Amendment applies at the state level. What precedent supports the resident’s claim?
The Court would likely rule in favor of the resident, applying the Second Amendment through the Fourteenth Amendment as in McDonald v. Chicago (2010).
A religious family refuses to send their children to high school, citing their beliefs. The state mandates schooling through age 16. How would the Court likely rule?
The Court would likely side with the family, applying the Free Exercise Clause protection from Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972).