Exam 2 Questions

In Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg (1971), the Court _________ a “busing” plan designed to overcome de facto segregation in Charlotte, North Carolina School System.

In which case did the court hold the following? In order for the Court to compel school integration, and thereby remedy the effects of de facto segregation, the existing segregation must have some causal relationship to prior de jure segregation.

“The enumeration in the Constitution , of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”

Lochner v. New York struck down a state labor regulation for violation…

Meyer v. Nebraska struck down a state law that…

States may not compel parents to send their children to a public school, but must allow parents to seek alternatives to public education

In U.S. v Carolene Products, the Court declared that it would no longer subject socio-economic legislation to rigorous scrutiny. The Court appended Footnote Four to make clear…

In ___________, the Court held that there is a right to privacy that inheres in martial relationship due to its sacred status that is not enjoyed by individuals in other types of relationships.

In ___________, the Court extended the right to privacy to individuals engaged in non-martial sexual relationships.

In ___________, the Court held that the state has a legislature interest in preserving potential life and protecting the health and safety of pregnant women. These interests must be balanced against, and sometimes, outweight, the right to privacy regarding decisions about whether to have an abortion.

In which case did the Court hold the following? The Bill of Rights, as ratified in 1791, places limits on the federal government only and not the states.

The Court’s approach to the incorporation of the Bill of Rights can generally be labeled…

In McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court incorporated…

The Court claims that it will incorporate only those rights it deems to be ______.

The government’s power to take private property for public use is called:

Which of the following is NOT a regulatory taking under the Court’s rationale?

The case of Nollan v. California Coastal Commission involved