Supreme Court Composition and Substantive Due Process

The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868 following the Civil War to protect the rights of recently freed slaves. (True/False)

The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery in 1865. (True/False)

The Three-Fifths Clause of the Constitution counted slave populations as three-fifths of free populations for purposes of Congressional apportionment. (True/False)

The Fourteenth Amendment forbade Southern insurrectionists from holding federal office. (True/False)

The Fourteenth Amendment repudiated Southern state debts incurred during the Civil War. (True/False)

The Fourteenth Amendment contains three clauses that limit the power of state governments from encroaching on the rights of U.S. citizens. (True/False)

The Fourteenth Amendment's recognition of national citizenship status and its three protective clauses were devised to ensure the rights of recently emancipated slaves.

The Fourteenth Amendment was designed to justify federal intervention in state matters and provide legal recourse for emancipated persons as newly recognized U.S. citizens.

The Fourteenth Amendment was primarily intended to protect the rights of all citizens, not just emancipated slaves.

The Fourteenth Amendment was effective against continued and state enforced racial segregation and legal subjugation soon after its ratification.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) upheld the 'separate but equal' doctrine and declared Jim Crow laws unconstitutional.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) overturned the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and ruled that racial segregation in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Substantive due process refers to the principle by which the Supreme Court determines which rights are deemed fundamental and subject to strict scrutiny.

To pass strict scrutiny, a law must be justified by a compelling governmental interest, narrowly tailored to achieve its legitimate aim, and must be the least restrictive means of achieving such an aim.

Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the right to bear arms are typical examples of cases related to substantive due process.

Procedural due process only applies to criminal proceedings and does not include civil proceedings.

The term 'due process' suggests an obvious relation to the establishment of procedural rights rather than substantive rights.

Until very recently, the majority of the Supreme Court did not support the application of substantive due process to establish various constitutionally protected rights.

The doctrine of total incorporation countered the principles established by the Tenth Amendment. (True/False)

Selective incorporation allows the Supreme Court to decide, on a case-by-case basis, which provisions of the Bill of Rights to apply to the states. (True/False)

Palko v. Connecticut (1937) established the standard for selective incorporation. (True/False)

The Warren Court is seen as the heyday of selective incorporation. (True/False)

The Court incorporated all of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments through the Due Process Clause. (True/False)

The Court expanded the rights of suspects under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, and applied those rights to the states. (True/False)

Mapp v. Ohio (1961) applied the “exclusionary rule” only to federal cases. (True/False)

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) ordered states to provide counsel, at state expense, to indigent defendants in misdemeanor cases. (True/False)

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) held that suspects must be informed of their rights before interrogation. (True/False)

The Court incorporated 11 provisions of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments between 1961 and 1969. (True/False)

Benton v. Maryland (1969) incorporated the protection against double jeopardy as set out in the Fourth Amendment. (True/False)

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 enabled African American men to vote without any obstacles or restrictions. (True/False)

The Privileges or Immunities Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment was immediately accepted by the Supreme Court as a vehicle for incorporation of the Bill of Rights.

Selective incorporation is a juridical doctrine that makes all provisions of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states via an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Substantive Due Process only concerns certain legal procedures, and does not protect certain rights unrelated to procedure.

Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of all laws passed by the legislature.

The Three-Fifths Clause counted slave populations as three-fourths of free populations for purposes of Congressional representative apportionment.

The Thirteenth Amendment, ratified in 1865, declared the continuation of slavery in the United States.

The Privileges or Immunities Clause mimics the language of the Privileges and Immunities Clause found in Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution.

Procedural Due Process requires that when the state or federal government acts to deprive a citizen of a life, liberty, or property interest, the person must first be given notice and the opportunity to be heard.

Selective incorporation involves making all provisions of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states through a direct amendment to the Constitution.

The Thirteenth Amendment gave Congress power to enforce it by appropriate legislation.

The recent changes in the composition of the Court include the addition of several liberal justices, replacing former conservative justices.

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Court upheld Roe v. Wade, 1973, thereby reaffirming the limited right to abortion.

Justice Clarence Thomas's criticism of substantive due process aligns with his assertion that 'the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause is a secret repository of substantive guarantees against unfairness.'

The Bill of Rights, as originally proposed, applied only to the state governments.

Chief Justice John Marshall wrote the opinion in Barron v. Baltimore (1833) and opined that the Supreme Court had no authority to apply the Bill of Rights to the states.

The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was used as a vehicle for applying the Bill of Rights to the states in the Slaughterhouse Cases (1872).

The Supreme Court turned to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1925, in the case of Gitlow v. New York, as a potential vehicle for applying the Bill of Rights to the states.

Total incorporation advocates held that the Due Process Clause embodied or incorporated only a part of the Bill of Rights.

Total incorporation meant imposing on state court systems the requirement to have a trial by jury in civil suits where the amount in dispute exceeded $20.

The recent changes in composition of the Court include replacing former conservative justices with liberal justices.

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 2022, the Court upheld Roe v. Wade, 1973, thereby reaffirming an unlimited right to abortion.

Justice Clarence Thomas's criticism of substantive due process aligns with his assertion that 'the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause is a secret repository of substantive guarantees against unfairness.'