GOV SIX CASES

Name:

GOV SIX CASES

Multiple Choice
Identify the choice that best completes the statement or answers the question.

Read the entire passage before you try to answer the questions

Background of Marbury v Madison

In 1800 the government of the United States was still new. None of the branches, legislative-executive-judicial, was sure of their authority. This was especially true of the Supreme Court. What authority did the Supreme Court have? What cases could they rule on? Could they tell the other branches what to do? Article III of the Constitution established the Supreme Court but it was not very specific about the authority the court had.

The President of the United States has the power to appoint judges to the federal courts. Usually, the President appoints individuals who are members of his own political party or who share his ideas about politics.
In 1800, John Adams was President. Adams was a Federalist who wanted a strong central government. There was an election that year. Thomas Jefferson, who belonged to another political party, got elected. Jefferson was an anti-Federalist who wanted the states to have more power. There were many positions in the federal government that were empty. Before he left office, President Adams tried to fill these positions with people who shared his ideas.
President Adams appointed 58 new people. He asked his Secretary of State, John Marshall, to deliver the paperwork to these people so they could start their new jobs. Marshall delivered most of the papers. He was in a hurry, so he left some of the papers for the new Secretary of State, James Madison, to deliver. When he came into office, President Thomas Jefferson told Madison not to deliver the papers to some of the people Adams had appointed.
One of the individuals who didn't receive his papers was William Marbury. He sued James Madison and tried to get the Supreme Court of the United States to issue a writ of mandamus. A writ is a court order that forces an official to do something. Marbury argued that a law passed by Congress (the Judiciary Act of 1789) gave the Supreme Court of the United States the power to issue this writ. If the Court issued the writ, Madison would have to deliver the papers. Then Marbury would become a justice of the peace.

Thomas Jefferson

James Madison

John Adams

Marbury based his argument on the Judiciary Act of 1789. What did he claim the Act did?

a.	forced the President to make Federal court appointments	c.	forced one president to honor the acts of other presidents
b.	gave the Supreme Court the power to issue writs of mandamus	d.	allowed the Congress and the President to ignore the Supreme Court

What was the political philosophy of Thomas Jefferson

a.	Constitutionalist	c.	Anti-Federalist
b.	Federalist	d.	Republican

What is a writ of mandamus?

a.	an order issued by the court requiring someone to do something	c.	a requirement that the police produce a writ of habeas corpus
b.	an appointment to the court made by the President	d.	an oath taken by all Federal employees to protect and defend the constitution

What was the political philosophy of John Adams?

a.	Federalist	c.	Republican
b.	Anti-Federalist	d.	Democrat

Who tried to block the appointments of President Adams, who was leaving office?

a.	James Madison	c.	James Marbury
b.	Justice Marshall	d.	President Thomas Jefferson

If the Supreme Court issued the writ of mandamus, Madison would be forced to deliver the commission to Marbury.

a.	true	c.	no way to tell from the reading
b.	false

Why did Marbury sue James Madison?

a.	As Secretary of State Madison was supposed to deliver the paperwork to Marbury	c.	Marbury was a Federalist
b.	Madison was Secretary of State and an Anti-Federalist	d.	Marbury did not like Madison

Under our political system, who has the power to appoint judges to the federal courts.

a.	the House of Representatives	c.	the President
b.	the Supreme Court	d.	judges are elected not appointed

What did William Marbury want the government to do.

a.	He wanted the Congress to force Jefferson to honor his appointment	c.	He wanted the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus.
b.	He wanted the Senate to force Jefferson to honor his appointment	d.	He wanted the Supreme Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus

10.

An Act is a law passed by Congress.

a.	true	c.	neither true nor false
b.	false	d.	both true and false

11.

What job was William Marbury trying to get with the government?

a.	Army Captain	c.	Justice of the Peace (judge)
b.	Congressman	d.	Senator

The Supreme Court Ruling by John Marshall

The Supreme Court of the United States had to decide the case. The new Chief Justice of the United States was John Marshall. He was the same person who had been unable to deliver the paperwork in the first place!
The new chief justice, John Marshall, understood that if the Supreme Court issued a writ of mandamus (i.e., an order to force Madison to deliver the commission), the Jefferson administration would ignore it, and thus significantly weaken the authority of the courts. On the other hand, if the Court denied the writ, it might well appear that the justices had acted out of fear. Either case would be a denial of the basic principle of the supremacy of the law. Instead, Marshall found a common ground where the Court could chastise (scold) the Jeffersonians for their actions while enhancing the Supreme Court's power. His decision in this case has often been hailed as a judicial tour de force (a skillful decision showing power).
Marshall’s Decision
1. Marshall declared that Madison should have delivered the commission to Marbury.
2. Even though the Judiciary Act of 1789 (passed by Congress) gave the Supreme Court the power to issue writs of mandamus, Marshall said the Judiciary Act was wrong because it violated Article III of the Constitution
3. Because of the above two actions, Marshall ruled that the Supreme Court did not have the authority to issue the write of mandamus
So, while the case limited the court's power to issue writs in this case because it violated the Constitution, it greatly enhanced the Supreme Courts authority to say what was and what was not constitutional. From this point on the Supreme Court what have the authority to say what was constitutional.
Just as important, it emphasized that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and that the Supreme Court is the arbiter and final authority of the Constitution. As a result of this court ruling, the Supreme Court became an equal partner in the government.

12.

If John Marshall issued a writ of mandamus, forcing Jefferson to deliver the papers that allowed Marbury to become justice of peace, what would Jefferson do in answer to the writ?

a.	resign from office	c.	most likely obey the writ (order)
b.	most likely ignore the writ (order)	d.	most likely fire John Marshall from the Supreme Court

13.

If Jefferson obeyed the court order it would _____ the court, if Jefferson ignored the court order it would _____ the court.

a.	strengthen - weaken	c.	do nothing to - have no effect on
b.	weaken - strengthen

14.

If the Supreme Court refused to issue the writ of mandamus it would .......

a.	make the court look like it was not afraid of Jefferson or public opinion	c.	allow Congress to outlaw the Supreme Court
b.	make the court look like it was afraid of Jefferson	d.	allow the President to outlaw the Supreme Court

15.

What basic principle was Justice Marshall most concerned with?

a.	That Marbury get his commission as Justice of the Peach	c.	That the Jeffersonians be defeated
b.	That all branches of government, including the Constitution be equal parts of the government.	d.	That the law (Constitution) be supreme over any person, party or branch of government

16.

How did the decisions of Justice Marshall make the Supreme Court stronger.

a.	He established the principle that only the Supreme Court could say what was and what was not constitutional	c.	He ruled that Marbury should get his commission
b.	He established the principle that only the Congress could say what was and what was not constitutional	d.	He ruled that Jefferson had the right to withhold Marbury’s commission

17.

What is an additional principle established by Justice John Marshall in the Marbury v Madison case.

a.	The President was inferior to the Congress	c.	The Congress could pass laws (acts) that superceded the Constitution
b.	The Congress was inferior to the President	d.	The Constitution is the supreme law of the United States

18.

What is an additional principle established by Justice John Marshall in the Marbury v Madison case?

a.	Congress has the right to pass laws that may contradict the Constitution	c.	The President could refuse to enforce laws that he felt were unconstitutional
b.	Only the Supreme Court can determine what laws are constitutional or not	d.	That the Federalists are right and the Anti-Federalists are wrong

19.

In the 2000 elections there was a great deal of debate and many law suits about the election outcome in Florida. Finally the Supreme Court ruled that both sides had to accept the decisions of the State of Florida, giving George Bush the election. When the Supreme Court made its ruling, both sides backed off and accepted the courts decision. Justice John Marshall’s ruling in Marbury v Madison made this possible.

a.	This statement is true	c.	There is no way to tell if this statement is true or false
b.	This statement is false

20.

Ours is a government of laws, not men

a.	This statement is true	c.	This statement has no meaning
b.	This statement is false	d.	There is no way to tell if the statement is true or false

21.

Which cases were involved with civil rights?

a.	c, d, e,	c.	a, b, c
b.	a, b, f	d.	d, e, f

22.

Which cases were involved with the balance of power and authority of branches of governmnt?

a.	c, d, e	c.	d, e, f
b.	a, b, c	d.	a, c, d

Matching

a.	Marbury v. Madison	d.	Plessy v. Ferguson
b.	McCulloch v. Maryland	e.	Brown v. Board of Education Topeka
c.	United States v. Nixon	f.	Miranda v. Arizona

23.

Which case presented a constitutional crisis for the U.S. in the 1970’s and established that one branch of government could not ignore the constitutional authority of another branch.

24.

When the Constitution--the nation's highest law--conflicts with an act of the legislature, that act is invalid. This case establishes the Supreme Court's power of judicial review

25.

Which case was fought over this issue: defendants were questioned "while in custody or otherwise deprived of [their] freedom in any significant way." The petitioner was questioned by police, made oral admissions, and signed an inculpatory statement all without being notified of his right to counsel.

26.

The case presented two questions: Did Congress have the authority to establish the bank? Did the State law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers?

27.

Which case made the following decion: State law is within constitutional boundaries. The majority upheld state-imposed racial segregation. The justices based their decision on the separate-but-equal doctrine, that separate facilities for blacks and whites satisfied the Fourteenth Amendment so long as they were equal.

28.

California says that truck drivers from Mexico must have California drivers licenses. U.S. law under the NAFTA treaty, signed by President Clinton, says that they do not. If you are a lawyer who has to argue for the U.S. and against California, what Supreme Course case would you cite?

29.

Which case made this ruling: Despite the equalization of the schools by "objective" factors, like class size and buildings, intangible issues foster and maintain inequality. Racial segregation in public education has a detrimental effect on minority children because it is interpreted as a sign of inferiority. The long-held doctrine that separate facilities were permissible provided they were equal was rejected.

30.

Congress passes a law outlawing abortion in the United States. In Roe v. Wade the Supreme Court says the law passed by congress is unconstitutional. What case above gives the Supreme Court the power to do this?

31.

Which case was fought over this issue: Is the President's right to safeguard certain information, using his "executive privilege"
confidentiality power, entirely immune from judicial review?

32.

In a unanimous decision, the Court held that Congress had the power to incorporate the bank and that the State could not tax instruments of the national government employed in the execution of constitutional powers.

33.

Which case involved this event: The state of Louisiana enacted a law that required separate railway cars for blacks and whites. In 1892, an African American--who was seven-eighths Caucasian--took a seat in a "whites only" car of a Louisiana train. He refused to move to the car reserved for blacks and was arrested.

34.

In what case did Justice Marshall establish the authority of the Supreme Court as an equal branch of government?

35.

Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifiying them of their right to counsel (lawyer) and their protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?

36.

Congressional power supercedes state power

37.

The Court specifically outlined the necessary aspects of police warnings to suspects, including warnings of the the right to remain silent and the right to have counsel present during interrogations.

38.

Which case was decided on this issue: Black children were denied admission to public schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to the races.

39.

Which case said the president is subject to “due process of law” and the president must obey a subpoena presented to him

40.

Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?

41.

Does the segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprive the minority children of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment?

42.

Which case made the following ruling: segregation does not in itself constitute unlawful discrimination