El Camino College

Political Science 6 Review Sheets


Review sheet #1 Constitutional Interpretation

Legal Formalism

-Originalism-Original intent

-Literalism-plain meaning of the words


Legal Realists-competing ideas in a pluralistic system & changes over time


Natural Law-law exists outside of government


 Freedom of Speech

US v. Schenck (1919)

-creation of the Clear & Present danger test


US v. Abrams  (1919)

-significance of Justice Holmes dissent (free trade in ideas)


Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

-create new standard to replace Clear and Present Danger test

-right of free speech except “where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”


Freedom of Speech-Symbolic Expression

West Virginia Brd of Education v. Barnette (1943)

-refusal to salute the flag


US v. O’Brien (1968)

-burning of draft cards


Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969)

-wearing black armbands


Morse v. Frederick (2007)


TX v. Johnson (1989)

-burning the flag


Hill v. Colorado (2000)

-protest restrictions at abortion clinics


Freedom of Speech-Fighting Words/Hate Speech

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)

-first case for fighting words


Terminiello v. Chicago (1949)


Cohen v. CA (1971) 


RAV v. St. Paul (1992)

-hate speech ordinance, cross burning


Virginia v. Black (2003)

-hate speech ordinance but bans all types of hate speech

Review sheet #2

Freedom of Speech-Obscenity

Roth v. US (1957) (understand it as it relates to Miller)


Miller v. CA (1973)

-court creates Miller test which we still use today

1.  appeals to the prurient interest

2.  portrays sexual conduct in a patently offensive way

3.  lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value (slaps)

1 & 2 use a local community standard, 3 uses a national standard


New York v. Ferber (1982)

-child pornography


Osborne v. Ohio (1990)

-child pornography prohibited


Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997)


Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition (2002)

-child pornography ok if children are not used or if it is computer generated


US v. Stevens (2010)


 Freedom of Speech-Freedom of Association

-private organizations retain their associational rights when:

1.  their core activities are exercised in conjunction with  1st Amendment freedoms or

2.  when the organization possesses the characteristics of an intimate club


Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, & Bisexual Group of Boston (1995)

-St. Patricks’s Day Parade


Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000)


Freedom of the Press

 Prior Restraint

Near v. Minnesota (1931)


NY Times v. US (1971)

-Pentagon Papers case which court creates but does not use the Prior restraint standard



New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)

-creates the actual malice standard


Gertz v. Welch (1974)

-more clearly defined the public figure aspect of actual malice


Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988)

-Hustler Campari ad


Review sheet #3

Freedom of Religion-Establishment Clause

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

Lemon Test-the law must (1) have a secular purpose, (2) can not advance or inhibit religion, (3) can not create excessive entanglements between government and religion.


Everson v. Board of Education (1947)

-busing student on public buses to religious schools


McCollum v. Board of Education (1948) 


Engel v. Vitale (1962)

-ban on prayer in school


Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)

-moment of silence prohibited


McCreary County v. ACLU (2005)

Van Orden v. Perry (2005)

-public displays of the Ten Commandments

Freedom of Religion-Free Exercise

Church of Lukumi babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993)

-animal sacrifice by Santaria


Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

-children limited to 8th grade education


 Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith

-peyote case

Search & Seizure

Olmstead v. US (1928)


Katz v. US (1967)

-telephone booth wire tapping


Terry v. Ohio (1968)

-stop and frisk


 Random searches

Michigan Dept of St. Police v. Sitz (1990)

-DUI stops


Florida v. Bostick (1991)

-Suspicionless search


Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton (1995)

-random drug testing for school athletes


Racial Profiling

Illinois v. Wardlow (2000)


 Exclusionary Rule

Weeks v. US-apply exclusionary rule on Federal level

Wolf v. Colorado-denied the exclusionary rule to the states but did state that states had some criminal protections


Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

-apply the exclusionary rule to the states


Exceptions-Christian burial case (Nix v. Williams (1984)), Goodfaith exception (US v. Leon (1984))


 Right to Counsel 

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Miranda v. Arizona


Test #4


Right to Privacy 

Early foundations (Bell, Skinner) 

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) –contraception is prohibited in Conn.  Planned Parenthood trying to get the laws changed

Roe v. Wade (1973)
-follow a trimester system

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services
-MO law that cuts off state funding for abortions

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)
-Create new standard –undue burden
Looked at three factors:
-24 hour waiting period
-parental consent
-spousal consent

Stenberg v. Carhart
Case dealing with partial birth abortion laws

Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) 

Sexual Preference

Bowers v. Hardwicke

v. Texas (2003)

Equal Protection

Plessy v. Ferguson
-Separate but Equal Doctrine

McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents
(1950)-graduate school where facilities are segregated-missing out on the educational experience of networking

Brown v. Board of Education
-separate is inherently unequal
-doll tests-first time used psychological evidence

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education

De jure & de facto segregation

Affirmative Action

Regents, University of California v. Bakke (1978)

-race can be a factor but not the sole determining factor

Bollinger v. Grutter/Gratz

-University of Michigan case

Sex Discrimination 

Bradwell v. Illinois (1873)

Reed v. Reed (1971)-laws that give preference to men violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment (probate code treated women differently)

Craig v. Boren (1976)-different age limit for women buying “near beer”-continued to use the rational basis test

United States v. Virginia (1996)

-VMI’s (Virginia Military Institute) refusal to allow women to attend

To top of page

El Camino College, 16007 Crenshaw Blvd., Torrance, California 90506
Phone: 310-532-3760 Toll Free: 1-866-ELCAMINO (1-866-
Last Published 3/15/17