American Government 1010 separation exists between church and state.

Details-
Chapter 4 identification terms In the 1971 case of Lemon v. Kurtzman, the U.S.
Supreme Court heard arguments as to whether the
1. Civil Liberties- The protections of citizens from state should support a program that would provide
improper governmental action. Details- Most civil aide to religious schools. In determining whether the
liberties come from the Bill of Rights. Five of these government could give aid to an educational
explicitly guaranteed rights come from the First institution operated by a religious entity, the court
Amendment alone. These rights are: the right to applied a three-part test, now known as the Lemon
freedom and religion, freedom of speech, freedom of Test.
press, and the right to assemble peacefully. 7. Lemon Test- Rule articulated in Lemon v. Kurtzman
2. Civil Rights- The rights of citizens to political and according to which governmental action in respect to
social freedom and equality. Details- Civil rights are religion is permissible if it is secular in purpose, does
like your freedom to vote and your right to education. not lead to "excessive entanglement" with religion,
The federal government grants you these types of and neither promotes nor inhibits the practice of
right, but the state can also grant you rights. Rights religion. Details- There are three questions that must
granted by the states include marriage of the same be answered in the Lemon Test. These questions are:
sex. This right is now granted by the federal Does the action taken by the government, or the law
government, but before 2015, it was not. established, have a legitimate secular purpose? If the
3. Dual Citizenship- citizenship of two countries answer is no, the violates the clause. Is the primary
concurrently. Details- If a child is born in the US and goal of the government’s action, or law established,
his/her parents are foreigners, the child will take have the effect of advancing or inhibiting any
citizenship of both the US and the other country. Not religion? If the answer if yes, it violates the clause.
all countries allow dual citizenship. Some of these Does the action taken, or law established, allow for
countries are: Japan, China, Singapore, and Mexico. an intertwining of government with religion? If so, it
4. Selective Incorporation- A judicial doctrine violates the clause.
whereby most but not all of the protections found int 8. Free Exercise Clause- The first amendment clause
he Bill of Rights are made applicable to the states via that protects a citizen's right to believe and practice
the Fourteenth Amendment. Details- In 1920 a man whatever religion he or she chooses. Details- In 1878,
was arrested for passing out copies of a "left wing the Supreme Court was first called to interpret the
manifesto" that encourages citizens to riot in the extent of the Free Exercise Clause in Reynolds v.
name of socialism. He was arrested for an anarchy United States, as related to the prosecution of
law, but he argued that it was only a historical polygamy under federal law. The Supreme Court
analysis. It was later decided by the Supreme Court upheld Reynolds' conviction for bigamy, deciding
that his actions were not protected from the New that to do otherwise would provide constitutional
York statute by the Free Speech Clause. protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including
5. Miranda Rule- The convention derived from the those as extreme as human sacrifice. The Court said:
Supreme Court's 1966 ruling in the case of Miranda "Congress cannot pass a law for the government of
v. Arizona whereby persons under arrest must be the Territory which shall prohibit the free exercise of
informed of their legal rights, including their right to religion. The first amendment to the Constitution
counsel, before undergoing police interrogation. expressly forbids such legislation." Of federal
Details- Miranda's Rights were created because territorial laws, the Court said: "Laws are made for
Miranda confessed without knowing his rights. Every the government of actions, and while they cannot
time someone is arrested, they are read their Miranda interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions,
Rights. These rights state: "You have the right to they may with practices."
remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used 9. Strict Scrutiny- The most stringent standard of
against you in a court of law. You have the right to an judicial review of a government's actions in which the
attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be government must show that the law serves a
provided for you." "compelling state interest" Details- The Supreme
6. Establishment Clause- The First Amendment clause Court's decision in Village of Arlington Heights v.
that says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. provided
establishment of religion." This law means a wall of further definition to the concept of intent and clarified
 three particular areas in which intent of a particular
administrative or legislative decision becomes
apparent, the presence of any of which demands the
harsher equal protection test. The Court must use
strict scrutiny if one of these tests, among others, is
met: the impact is so "stark and dramatic" as to be
unexplainable on non-racial grounds, the historical
background of the decision suggests intent, the 13.
legislative and administrative records leading up to
the decision show intent.
10. Clear and Present Danger- The criterion formerly
used to determine whether speech is protected or
unprotected, based on its capacity to present a "clear
and present danger" to society. Details- Following
Schenck v. United States, "clear and present danger"
became both a public metaphor for First Amendment
speech and a standard test in cases before the Court
where a United States law limits a citizen's First
Amendment rights; the law is deemed to be
constitutional if it can be shown that the language it
prohibits poses a "clear and present danger". 14.
However, the "clear and present danger" criterion of
the Schenck decision was replaced in 1969 by
Brandenburg v. Ohio, and the test refined to
determining whether the speech would provoke an
"imminent lawless action".
11. Speech Plus- Speech accompanied by activities such
as sit-ins, picketing, and demonstrations. Protection
of this form of speech under the first amendment is
constitutional, and restrictions imposed by state or
local authorities are acceptable if properly balanced
by considerations of public order. Details- An
example of speech plus is symbolic behavior. 15.
Symbolic behavior is a broad designation that
includes activities such as civil disobedience. Burning
a U.S. flag, a Selective Service draft card, or an effigy
are some of the best-known examples of symbolic
behavior. Interpreting symbolic behavior is
challenging, as it is often difficult to separate speech
elements from behavioral elements. The U.S. was
built on symbolic speech and expressive conduct with
acts such as the Boston Tea Party. In light of our
country's history, courts today almost always support
freedom of symbolic speech unless there are criminal16.
or potentially dangerous elements involved.
12. Prior Restraint- An effort by a government agency
to block the publication of material it deems libelous
or harmful in some other way: censorship. In the
United States, the court forbid prior restraint except
under the most extraordinary circumstances. Details-
An example is a political group that wants to stage a
protest in front of City Hall. If the city government
denies the political group a permit to hold the protest,
the city might be imposing prior restraint on the
group's speech by preventing the protest from taking
place. If a state or federal law imposes a licensing or
permitting requirement on the exercise of free speech,
that law may be considered an illegal prior restraint.
Libel- A written statement made in "reckless
disregard of the truth" and considered damaging to a
victim because it is "malicious, scandalous, and
defamatory." Details- Proving libel occurred requires
the victim to show the court that certain elements
took place: Defendant made a false, defamatory
statement about the plaintiff, Defendant published or
shared the statement with a third party, Defendant
made the statement with the intent to cause harm, or
negligently, giving no care to the harm that was likely
to be caused, In some situations, the plaintiff must
prove that the defendant’s statement resulted in
“special damages."
Slander- An oral statement made in "reckless
disregard of the truth" and considered damaging to a
victim because it is "malicious, scandalous, and
defamatory." Details- Examples of slander include:
Claiming a person is gay, lesbian, or bisexual, when it
is untrue, in an attempt to harm his or her reputation,
telling someone that a certain person cheated on his
taxes, or committed tax fraud, saying that a certain
person had an affair with a supervisor or manager in
order to receive a promotion, and telling co-workers a
made-up, or unverified story about a certain person
stealing from petty cash.
Fighting Words- Speech that directly incites
damaging conduct. Details- The fighting words
doctrine comes from the case of Chaplinsky v. New
Hampshire. Walter Chaplinsky was distributing
pamphlets on a street when he got into a verbal
altercation with a city marshal. Chaplinsky called the
marshal a 'racketeer' and declared he was 'a damned
fascist and the whole government of Rochester are
fascist or agents of fascists.' Chaplinsky was
convicted under a city ordinance prohibiting people
in public from calling others an offensive name.
Exclusionary Rule-The ability of courts to exclude
evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth
Amendment. Details- In the case of Weeks v. United
States, under the Fourth Amendment prohibiting
unreasonable searches and seizures. This decision,
however, created the rule only on the federal level.
The "Weeks rule," which made an exception for cases
 at the state level, was adopted by numerous states at a
time during prohibition.
17. Grand Jury- A jury that determines whether
sufficient evidence is available to justify a trial.
Grand juries do not rule on the accused's guilt or
innocence. Details- A grand jury is presented with
evidence from the U.S. attorney, the prosecutor in
federal criminal cases. The grand jury determines 21.
whether there is “probable cause” to believe the
individual has committed a crime and should be put
on trial. If the grand jury determines there is enough
evidence, an indictment will be issued against the
defendant.
18. Double Jeopardy- The Fifth Amendment right
providing that a person cannot be tried twice for the
same crime. Details- For example, a defendant who
had completed a given prison term for selling five
pounds of cocaine could not be re-sentenced to a
longer term because it was later discovered that he or
she had actually sold 10 pounds of cocaine. Double
jeopardy does not work in civil lawsuits. For
example, if a defendant is found not guilty of
manslaughter in a drunk-driving incident, he or she
cannot be tried again in criminal court. However, the
deceased victim’s family is free to sue the defendant
for wrongful death in a civil court to recover financial
22.
damages.
19. Eminent Domain- the right of a government or its
agent to expropriate private property for public use,
with payment of compensation. Details- If someone
lives in a house on one acre next to Highway 47. The
state wants to widen the road due to the higher traffic
and the new casino that was built down the road. In
order to widen the road, the state needs the space on
either side of the road.Because the state deems the
road necessary, it seizes that person's property and
gives them $250,000 for it. That someone does not
have the opportunity to say no, though he/she can
challenge whether the $250,000 is fair market value.
20. Cruel and Unusual Punishment- Punishment
prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the 23.
Constitution. Cruel and unusual punishment includes
torture, deliberately degrading punishment, or
punishment that is too severe for the crime
committed. Details- In 1998, Daryl Atkins and his
friend robbed and shot a man named Eric Nesbitt.
Atkins was found guilty at trial of abduction, armed
robbery, and capital murder. In spite of the fact that
Dr. Evan Nelson testified at trial that Atkins suffered
from mild mental retardation, the jury sentenced
Atkins to be executed. Atkins’ attorneys appealed
the sentence to the Virginia Supreme Court, which
upheld the lower court’s decision. When the matter
was taken before the U.S. Supreme Court on the
grounds that executing a person with a mental
disability violated the protections of the 8th
Amendment.
Right to Privacy- The right to be left alone, which has
been interpreted by the supreme court to entail
individual access to birth control and abortions.
Details- There are many reasons why states create
laws that prevent women from terminating
pregnancies. Some of the reasons may be outdated,
some may be religious, some may be political and
some may be medical. Regardless of the reason, the
courts have found that the right of privacy includes a
woman being able to terminate her pregnancy, with
a few exceptions, without the interference of the
government. The 'necessary to achieve a compelling
interest' test is not useful in this situation because of
the issues of fetus rights versus the woman's privacy
rights. Therefore, the privacy right with regards to
abortion has been divided up into a few different
areas.
Equal Protection Rule- “No State shall make or
enforce any law which shall … deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.” Details- In 1954, the ruling in Plessy v
Ferguson was overturned with the 1954 Supreme
Court decision in Brown v Board of Education of
Topeka, which revolved around the issue of
separation of schools for white and black students. A
unanimous decision was handed down by the
Supreme Court justices, stating that separate
educational facilities for white and blacks is unequal
and violates the Equal Protection clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment. This case was a huge boon
to the nation’s effort to end racial segregation within
the United States.
Separate but Equal rule- a legal doctrine in United
States constitutional law according to which racial
segregation did not violate the Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, which
guaranteed "equal protection" under the law to all
people. Details- In the pivotal case of Plessy v.
Ferguson in 1896, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that
racially separate facilities, if equal, did not violate the
Constitution. Segregation, the Court said, was not
discrimination.
24. De Jure Segregation/De Facto Segregation- Racial ALL THE SUPREME COURT CASES FROM THE
segregation, especially in public schools, that happens WIKI PROJECT ARE FAIR GAME FOR THE
“by fact” rather than by legal requirement. Details- CHAPTER 4 QUIZ. ALSO, IT IS WORTH
For example, often the concentration of African- MENTIONING THAT ALL AMENDMENTS
Americans in certain neighborhoods produces WITHIN THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND THEIR
neighborhood schools that are predominantly black, CONTENTS ARE POSSIBILITIES AS
or segregated in fact (de facto), although not by law QUESTIONS/ANSWERS. I ONLY POINT THIS
(de jure). OUT BECAUSE THESE ITEMS ARE NOT
25. Intermediate Scrutiny- Constitutional law which LISTED HERE ON THE REVIEW SHEET.
refers to a test used in some contexts to determine the
constitutionality of a law. Details- Intermediate
Scrutiny under Equal Protection – is the use of a
classification substantially related to accomplishing
an important governmental interest. Intermediate
Scrutiny under Due Process – are the means
employed substantially related to the accomplishment
of an important governmental interest.
26. Affirmative Action- the practice or policy of
favoring individuals belonging to groups known to
have been discriminated against previously. Details-
In appealing the Supreme Court’s decision on Grutter
v. Bollinger, this case questioned whether the state of
Michigan violated the Equal Protection Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment by giving the decision on
whether to ban discrimination based on race and sex
in admissions to state universities. Michigan voters
had approved, in 2006, an amendment to the state’s
constitution making Affirmative Action illegal in
public education, employment, and contracting,
except where mandated by federal law, such as in
entities receiving federal funding. On April 22, 2014,
in the case of Schuette v. Coalition to Defend
Affirmative Action the Supreme Court upheld the
constitutionality of Michigan’s ban on Affirmative
Action.

**27. Due Process- fair treatment through the normal

judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.
Details-An example of due process is the use of
eminent domain. In the United States, the Takings
Clause of the Fifth Amendment prevents the federal
government from seizing private property without
notice and compensation. While the use of eminent
domain is granted to the federal government, if it
wants to use a parcel of land to build a new highway
it will have to pay fair market value for the property.
The Fifteenth Amendment extends the Takings
Clause to state and local governments.

PLEASE NOTE THAT ANY COURT CASES

DISCUSSED DURING LECTURE AS WELL AS