Political Science /Federalism and the Balance of Power Part 2
Federalism and the Balance of Power Part 2
This deck covers key Supreme Court cases and constitutional amendments related to federalism and the balance of power in the United States.
The Supreme Court used which constitutional amendment as the basis for striking down the 1875 Civil Rights Act? First Amendment Second Amendment Tenth Amendment Fourteenth Amendment
Tenth Amendment
Tap to flip
Space↑↓
←→Navigate
SSpeak
FFocus
1/10
Key Terms
Term
Definition
The Supreme Court used which constitutional amendment as the basis for striking down the 1875 Civil Rights Act?
First Amendment
Second Amendment
Tenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment
Tenth Amendment
Hover to peek or log in to view all
In Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court struck down a law that required state and local law enforcement officials to conduct background checks on handgun purchasers because the law
infringed upon the Second Amendment right for individuals to bear arms.
ignored the constitutional principle of habeas corpus.
violated the Tenth Amendment's guarantee of state sovereignty.
encroached upon the constitutional right to privacy.
violated the Tenth Amendment's guarantee of state sovereignty
Hover to peek or log in to view all
Why was United States v. Lopez (1995) important?
It was the first time since the New Deal that the Supreme Court limited the power of Congress as outlined under the commerce clause.
It was the first time that the Court had used the Tenth Amendment to limit the power of Congress.
The Court found the line-item veto unconstitutional.
The Court gave a broad interpretation of the commerce clause that expanded the power of the federal government over the states.
It was the first time since the New Deal that the Supreme Court limited the power of Congress as outlined under the commerce clause.
Which statement best describes the Supreme Court's decisions about federalism during the 1990s?
The Court granted the national government more power over the states.
The Court limited the power of the national government over the state governments.
The Court declined to hear federalism cases, arguing that they are political questions.
The Court dramatically limited the ability of states to sue the national government in federal courts.
The Court limited the power of the national government over the state governments.
Hover to peek or log in to view all
Which element of the First Amendment was, according to the news clip, most at stake in this case?
freedom of the press
freedom of assembly
freedom of religion
freedom of expression
freedom of religion
Which two constitutional protections were most in tension in the case presented in the news clip?
freedom of religion (First Amendment) and equal protection under the law (Fourteenth Amendment)
freedom of religion (First Amendment) and due process (Fifth Amendment)
freedom of religion (First Amendment) and freedom of expression (First Amendment)
freedom of expression (First Amendment) and states rights (Tenth Amendment)
freedom of religion (First Amendment) and equal protection under the law (Fourteenth Amendment)
Related Flashcard Decks
Study Tips
- Press F to enter focus mode for distraction-free studying
- Review cards regularly to improve retention
- Try to recall the answer before flipping the card
- Share this deck with friends to study together
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
The Supreme Court used which constitutional amendment as the basis for striking down the 1875 Civil Rights Act?
First Amendment
Second Amendment
Tenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment | Tenth Amendment |
In Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court struck down a law that required state and local law enforcement officials to conduct background checks on handgun purchasers because the law
infringed upon the Second Amendment right for individuals to bear arms.
ignored the constitutional principle of habeas corpus.
violated the Tenth Amendment's guarantee of state sovereignty.
encroached upon the constitutional right to privacy. | violated the Tenth Amendment's guarantee of state sovereignty |
Why was United States v. Lopez (1995) important?
It was the first time since the New Deal that the Supreme Court limited the power of Congress as outlined under the commerce clause.
It was the first time that the Court had used the Tenth Amendment to limit the power of Congress.
The Court found the line-item veto unconstitutional.
The Court gave a broad interpretation of the commerce clause that expanded the power of the federal government over the states. | It was the first time since the New Deal that the Supreme Court limited the power of Congress as outlined under the commerce clause. |
Which statement best describes the Supreme Court's decisions about federalism during the 1990s?
The Court granted the national government more power over the states.
The Court limited the power of the national government over the state governments.
The Court declined to hear federalism cases, arguing that they are political questions.
The Court dramatically limited the ability of states to sue the national government in federal courts. | The Court limited the power of the national government over the state governments. |
Which element of the First Amendment was, according to the news clip, most at stake in this case?
freedom of the press
freedom of assembly
freedom of religion
freedom of expression | freedom of religion |
Which two constitutional protections were most in tension in the case presented in the news clip?
freedom of religion (First Amendment) and equal protection under the law (Fourteenth Amendment)
freedom of religion (First Amendment) and due process (Fifth Amendment)
freedom of religion (First Amendment) and freedom of expression (First Amendment)
freedom of expression (First Amendment) and states rights (Tenth Amendment) | freedom of religion (First Amendment) and equal protection under the law (Fourteenth Amendment) |
Based on the outcome of this case, which statement most accurately describes the balance between freedom of religion and same-sex marriage rights?
Religious freedoms clearly take precedence over same-sex marriage rights.
Same-sex marriage rights clearly take precedence over freedom of religion issues.
It's unclear; the Supreme Court overruled an appeals court's decision against the baker, granting him a new hearing, but did not settle the issue between freedom of religion and same-sex marriage rights.
Nothing; the Supreme Court did not settle the issue between freedom of religion and same-sex marriage rights and instead, referred the matter to Congress for a constitutional solution. | It's unclear; the Supreme Court overruled an appeals court's decision against the baker, granting him a new hearing, but did not settle the issue between freedom of religion and same-sex marriage rights. |
What are fair limits on certain rights in order to accommodate civil liberties? Can the Supreme Court ever resolve this tension? What does the textbook say about this situation? | Fair limits to accommodate civil liberties can be in the form of safety. The book discusses a minister being charged for ignoring ban on gatherings in excess of 50 people. Yes the minister was practicing his civil liberty of freedom of religion, however he was putting people in danger by doing so. Anytime health or safety are in jeopardy a limit should be placed. Although when emotional well being is being questioned this type of safety is not accounted for. In Snyder v. Phelps (2011), free speech was ruled in favor of even though the speech in question was protesting at fallen soldiers funerals. I don't believe the supreme court can resolve this tension. These issues are based in emotion not logic, and therefore no matter what decision is made someone will be unhappy with it. |
The Fourteenth Amendment
forced state governments to abide by all of the provisions in the Bill of Rights immediately after its ratification in 1868.
had no effect on state governments because it was designed to apply only to the federal government.
forced state governments to abide by almost every provision in the Bill of Rights, but the process took more than 100 years.
required states to abide by the First Amendment to the Constitution but not any of the other amendments to the Constitution. | forced state governments to abide by almost every provision in the Bill of Rights, but the process took more than 100 years. |
The 1937 case Palko v. Connecticut focused on the
Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Sixth Amendment's right to counsel.
Second Amendment's right to bear arms.
Fifth Amendment's protection against double jeopardy. | Fifth Amendment's protection against double jeopardy. |