Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
US SUPREME COURT CASES BLURTING - Coggle Diagram
US SUPREME COURT CASES BLURTING
OBERGEFELL V HODGES (2015) - Secured the right to same sex marriage.
An example of loose constructionalsim, interpeetation and potentially judical activism. Also a clear example of the courts protecting minority rights.
WEST VIRGINA VS EPA (2022)- Limited the role of the executive by saying that it needed DIRECT congressional approval to regulate emissons.
KENNEDY VS BERMERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT (2022)
Ruled in favour of Kennedy that he should be allowed to pray at school football games. An exmaple of the courts protecting religous rights, an example of how the court impacts public life, an perhaps impacting how institutons respect religon.
US V TEXAS (2021) - Said that texas strict abortion law could take place, but would review it later. Showing their importance in checking the power of all legislatures.
FULTON V CITY OF PHILADELPHIA (2021) - Ruled that philadeliphia could not refuse to work with a foster care agency that did not permit same sex couples fostering. This shows how the court balances public intrests, by respecting religous freedoms.
CITIZENS UNITED VS FEC(2010)- Limiting campaign spending is a threat to free speech, protection of constiutional rights.
NEW YORK STATE RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIARTION VS BUREN 2022
NY law that said you couldnt carry concelaed arms inflicts on the right to bear arms.
National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra (2018)
Summary: The Court ruled that a California law requiring crisis pregnancy centers to provide information about abortion violated the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech.
DOBBS V JACKSON 2022- WAS split ideaologically 6-3 showing how ideaology is prememnant in rulings.
NEW YORK STATE RIFLE AND PISTOL ASSOCIATION VS BUREN 2022
TEXAS V US- 2021 - ABORTION SAID WAS OK BUT THEYD COME BACK TO IT.
FULTON V PHILADEMIPHIA, 2021 PHILDAELPHIA COULTN REFUSE TO WORK WITH FOSTER CARE AGEDNY AS THEY DIDNT PERMIT SAME SEX FOSTERING.
dept. Homeland security vs regents university california 2020.Trump administrations plans to abolish DACA unconstitutional.
Dept. homeland security vs California regents university 2020
Dept Homeland security vs regents university californnia 2020.
Trump vs thompson 2022- Trump couldnt block the release of whitehouse docs. On january 6th riots
Moyle vs us 2024 chose not to make its own ruling, restored a circuit court decison that idahos planned ban on emergy abortions unconstitutional
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS VS SELBUIS 2012- Ruled that court should avoid ruling on the legislature.
BRETT KAVANAUGH 2018- 48-50 VOTE- HIGHLY POLITICSISED.
President Biden and the Student Loan Forgiveness Plan (2023)
Case: Biden v. Nebraska (2023)
The Supreme Court struck down Biden’s major student loan forgiveness program, ruling that the administration did not have the authority under the HEROES Act to cancel $400 billion in federal student loans.
What did Biden do?
Instead of giving up, Biden announced a new plan to cancel student debt using a different legal basis — the Higher Education Act — and continued pursuing relief through alternative means.
Did he “ignore” the ruling?
Technically, no, because he didn’t continue the exact same program the Court blocked.
But he pushed right up to the edge, effectively bypassing the decision by crafting a workaround — which some critics called a form of executive defiance or undermining the Court’s authority.
2005 ropper vs simmonds
GRUTTER VS BOLLINGER 2004