Buscar
Estás en modo de exploración. debe iniciar sesión para usar MEMORY

   Inicia sesión para empezar

Buratti


🇬🇧
In Inglés
Creado:


Public
Creado por:
Chiara Francucci


0 / 5  (0 calificaciones)



» To start learning, click login

1 / 25

[Front]


Marbury vs Madison (1804)
[Back]


Marshall defines the constitution as a paramount law, judicial review of legislation

Practique preguntas conocidas

Manténgase al día con sus preguntas pendientes

Completa 5 preguntas para habilitar la práctica

Exámenes

Examen: pon a prueba tus habilidades

Pon a prueba tus habilidades en el modo de examen

Aprenda nuevas preguntas

Modos dinámicos

InteligenteMezcla inteligente de todos los modos
PersonalizadoUtilice la configuración para ponderar los modos dinámicos

Modo manual [beta]

El propietario del curso no ha habilitado el modo manual
Modos específicos

Aprende con fichas
Completa la oración
Escuchar y deletrearOrtografía: escribe lo que escuchas
elección múltipleModo de elección múltiple
Expresión oralResponde con voz
Expresión oral y comprensión auditivaPractica la pronunciación
EscrituraModo de solo escritura

Buratti - Marcador

1 usuario ha completado este curso

Ningún usuario ha jugado este curso todavía, sé el primero


Buratti - Detalles

Niveles:

Preguntas:

29 preguntas
🇬🇧🇬🇧
Marbury vs Madison (1804)
Marshall defines the constitution as a paramount law, judicial review of legislation
McCullok vs. Maryland (1819)
Enlargement of the supreme court supremacy, necessary and proper clause
Fletcher vs. Peck (1810)
Supreme court apply the principle Marbury vs Madison to state statuary law
Barron vs. Baltimore (1833)
The federal bill of rights could not have been applied to the legislation of the state
Scott vs Sanford (1857)
The supreme court stated that the federation had no power to establish rules over state law on the issue of slavery
Plessy vs Ferguson (1896)
Supreme court declare that the two communities are “separate but equal”, a black man take a seat on a white bus.
Lochner vs New York (1905)
The supreme court, who upheld the liberal economy, declared null the act of the state of New York which had introduced a maximum of working hours for backers.
Brown vs. Board of education of Topeka (1954)
Declared that the division in school system between black and white is unconstitutional
Loving vs Virginia (1967)
The court abolish the state law prohibiting interracial marriage
Roe vs Wade (1973)
About the right of abortion
Hobergefell vs Hodges (2005)
About the same sax marriage
McDonald vs Chicago (2010)
Incorporation of the right to bears arms
Buckley vs. Veleo (1976)
Limitation to freedom to speech justified by a superior interest in preventing political corruption
INS vs Chanda (1983)
The supreme court struck down the legislative veto
Clinton vs City of New York (1998)
The supreme court ruled that the Line item veto act (1996) is unconstitutional
National federation of independent business vs Sebelius (2012)
The supreme court upheld the patient protection and affordable care act made by Obama
ART 1, section 8
Competences of the Supreme Court
ART 6
Supremacy clause = authority of the United States shall be the Supreme Law of the Land so hanno la priorita su qualsiasi legge statale in conflitto
ART 5
Amending procedure (proposal [2 modi] and ratification [2 modi]) rigidity of constitution
13th amend
Abolish slavery
14th amend
Due process, equal protection, privileges and immunities
15th amend
Right to vote for everyone
16th amend
Federal Government levy taxes according to the income tax  1913 Federal Reserve (central bank)
JUDICIARY ACT (1891, 1925)
Creation of federal appellate courts
BUDGET AND ACCOUNTING ACT (1921)
Federal budget proposals to the Congress (Bureau of Budget)
VOTING RIGHTS ACT (1965)
Prohibits any racial discrimination in states’ legislation
FEDERAL ELECTORAL CAMPAIGN ACT (1971)
Control private contribution to political campaign
LINE ITEM VETO ACT (1996)
President can veto a single provision of a bill