In order to perform well on the AP Exam, in May, you'll have to understand the following Supreme Court Cases. What does this mean? You'll have to understand:

• The Facts of the case
• The Consitutional Question
• Reasoning for the Majority and Dissenting Opinions
• Implications of decisions for the required cases
• Transfer to new cases
• Connection between decisions and their lives

List of Need to Know Court Cases

• McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
  • Established the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution and federal laws over state laws
• United States v. Lopez (1995)
  • Congress may not use the commerce clause to make possession of a gun in a school zone a federal crime.
• Engel v. Vitale (1962)
  • School sponsorship of religious activities violates the establishment clause.
• Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
  • Compelling Amish student to attend school past the eighth grade violates the free exercise clause.
• Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
  • Public school students have the right to wear black armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War.
• New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)
  • Bolstered the freedom o the press, establishing a "heavy presumption against prior restraint" even in cases involving national security.
• Schenck v. United States (1919)
  • Speech creating a "clear and present danger" is not protected by the First Amendment.
• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
  • Guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent.
• Roe v. Wade (1973)
  • Extended the right of privacy to a woman's decision to have an abortion.
• McDonald v. Chicago (2010)
  • The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense is applicable to states.
• Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
  • Race-based school segregation violates the equal protection clause.
• Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)
  • Political spending by corporations, associations, and labor unions is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment.
• Baker v. Carr (1961)
  • Opened the door to equal protection challenges to redistricting an the development of the "one person, one vote" doctrine by ruling that challenges to redistricting did not raise "political questions" that would keep federal courts from reviewing such challenges.
• Shaw v. Reno (1993)
  • Legislative redistricting must be conscious of race and ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
• Marbury v. Madison (1803)
  • Established the principle of judicial review empowering the Supreme Court to nullify an act of the legislative or executive branch that violates the Constitution.