Poly Sci 412 final

  1. Ex parte
    One party only
  2. Functus officio
    Task performed
  3. Immunity
    Freedom from lawful duties
  4. In camera
    In chambers
  5. Indemnify
    secure against loss
  6. Injunction
    Writ restraining a person from doing acts deemed unjust or harmful to others
  7. In pari materia
    Upon the same matter or subject
  8. In re
    Concerning with
  9. Inter alia
    Among other things
  10. Interlocutory
    Incident to a suit pending
    by the very act itself
  12. Jure belli
    By the right
  13. Jus belli
    The law of war
  14. Jus commune
    Natural rule of the right
  15. Libel
    Defamatory writing
  16. Mandamus
    Judicial writ ordering the doing of which is a legal duty
  17. Ministerial duty
    Definite duty
  18. Nol'le Prose'Qui
    Unwilling to prosecute
  19. No'lo Conten'Dere
    No contest
  20. Parens patriae
    Guardianship over minors, insane persons, or incompetent
  21. Per curiam
    Opinion made by whole bench
  22. Per se
    By itself
  23. Plaintiff-in-error
    One who sues out a writ of error to a judgment
  24. Plenary
  25. Prerogative writ
    Process by which mandamus to review an adminstrative determination
  26. Prima Facie Evidence
    Collection of facts that draw a conclusion
  27. Pro forma
    As a matter of fact
  28. Propio vigore
    By its own force
  29. Quash
  30. Quo Warranto
    title of public officer or franchise is tested
  31. Recuse
  32. Seriatim
  33. Sovereign Immunity
    Nation or state cannot be sued
  34. Special verdict
    Jury's special finding of the facts
  35. Subpoean duces tecum
    witness attends with documents as evidence
  36. Tort
    Civil wrong
  37. Traverser
    One who denies
  38. Vacate
    To cancel
  39. Voir dire
    Examination of jurors
  40. Terminello V. Chicago
    Facts: Terminello was giving a speech inside a building. Alomost started a riot outside and he was arrestted.

    Ruling: Terminello was found not guilty because he did not direct his speech to anyone. Clear and present danger test used to dertermine if this speech produced evil.
  41. Feiner V. New York
    Facts: Feiner was speaking in the streets on behave of some black men who were convicted. He called mayor a bum and a large crowd formed. He was arrested for disturbing the peace.

    Ruling: Court upheld lower court's decision saying his speech in public was dangerous. This was clear and present danger.
  42. imforma pauperis
    State would pay to have this heard in Superem Court
  43. Dennis V. US

    Smith Act punishes anyone who teaches or advocates the overthrow of the government by force.
    Facts: Dennis was arrestted for forming a communist party to overthrow US government.

    Ruling: Judge Hand said this was clear and probable danger saying that the group were working towards overthrowing the government and plotting to. Smith Act upheld.
  44. Brandenburg V. Ohio
    US overturned Dennis V. in this case using De Facto. Person cannot be punished unless what they are doing will result in violations of law.
  45. Cohen V. CA
    Facts: Cohen wore a jacket into a courtroom that said "Fuck the draft." Lower court said his jacket was lud and disturbed the peace.

    Ruling: Overturned and said that CA violated 1st and 14th amendments.
  46. Texas V. Johnson
    Facts: Johnson gives a distastful speech about America and then burns the flag. He was arrestted for flag burning.

    Ruling: Overturned; strict scunity test used. Johnson did not disturb the peace and Texas flag buring laws prohibt expressive speech. This leads to the 1989 flag protection act, which was overturned because it was unconstitiounal.
  47. RAV V. St. Paul
    Facts: RAV burned a cross in a family's yard and said some racial things that St. Paul had on a list of other words as fighting words. Case was about St. Paul classifing certain words as fighting words.

    Ruling: Superme Court ruled that St. Paul's ordanance is unconstituional becauseit limits peoples words. It was subject matter classification.
  48. Brandenburg V. Ohio
    Facts: Brandenburg was planning a Klan meeting saying things about Jews and blacks

    Ruling: Justice Brennan said that the Klan does not present clear and present danger and he also mentions the Imminent lawless test; unless speech creates a situation of imminent lawless than speech is protected.
  49. Wisconsin V. Mitchell
    Facts: A guy told a group of black guys to beat up this white guy for no reason. The guy who encoarged the fighting was arrestted because he promoted the fight.

    Ruling: Supereme Court agreed with the lower court that the guy's speech cause the fight.
  50. Virginia V. Black
    Facts: Black had a Klan ralley on private property and was arestted for burning a cross.

    Ruling: Supreme Court ruled that you can burn a cross as long as it does not threaten anyone and it is on private property
  51. Stanley V. Georgia
    Facts: Officers found films in Stanley's bedroom and they were found obscene. He was arestted for the material.

    Ruling: Having obscene material in private possession is permitted.
  52. Miller V. CA
    Facts: Miller was mailing sexual material to people who didn't request it.

    Ruling: Miller test made saying that work would be taken as a whole appearing to prurient intrest, it has sexual content and has some kind of scientfic or political value. Average person uses contempoary standards to find work offensive.
  53. Paris Adult Theatre V. Slaton
    Facts: Sued for showing obscene films

    Ruling: Obscene material is not protected
  54. Jenkins V. Georgia
    Facts: Convicted for showing the movie Carnal Knowledge in a motion picture thearte.

    Ruling: The film shows occasional nudity, but nudity alone does not render material obscene under Miller's standards.
  55. New York V. Ferber
    Facts: Ferber is guilty of having childern act in pornography.

    Ruling: Miller test does not have to be used when childern are involved in underaged sexual acts. Court upheld Ferber's conviction.
  56. Pope V. Illinoise
    Facts: Pope sold obscene magazines to police and arestted for selling of these items.

    Ruling: The proper inquiry is not whether an ordinary member of any given community would find serious value in the allegedly obscene material, but whether a reasonable person would find such value in the material, taken as a whole.
  57. Barnes V. Glen Theatre
    Facts: Thearte said nude dancing in private place was protected by first amendmemt rights.

    Ruling: Indiana's public indecency law to prevent totally nude dancing does not violate the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of expression.
  58. City of Erie V. Pap's AM
    Facts: Pap said that ordances requiring nude dancers to wear miminal clothing violated freedom of speech and expression.

    Ruling: nude dancing of the type at issue here is expressive conduct that falls within the outer ambit of the First Amendment's protection.
  59. Reno V. ACLU
    Facts: Is child pornography protected under the 1st and 5th amendment.

    Ruling: The Court has the right to protect minors from seeing obscene images on the web.
  60. New York Times V. US
    • Facts: "Pentagon Papers Case," the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials
    • belonging to a classified Defense Department study regarding the history of United States activities in Vietnam.

    Ruling: Court held that the government did not overcome the "heavy presumption against" prior restraint of the press in this case
  61. Hustler V. Faldwell
    Facts: Hustler Magazine featured a "parody" of an advertisement, modeled after an actual ad campaign, claiming that Falwell, had a drunken incestuous relationship with his mother in an outhouse.

    Ruling: Court held that public figures, such as Jerry Falwell, may not recover for the intentional infliction of emotional distress without showing that the offending publication had actual malice.
  62. US V. Eichman
    Facts: Eichman set a flag ablaze on the steps of the U.S. Capitol while protesting the government's domestic and foreign policy.

    • Ruling: Court struck down the law because "its asserted interest is related to the suppression of free expression and concerned with the content of
    • such expression.
  63. 3 tests used for obscenity
    Hicklin: Under this test, judges considered a work to be obscene if any portion of the material had a tendency "to or corrupt minds who are open to such influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall.

    • Roth: whether to the average person, applying
    • contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
  64. Battista V. US
    Facts: Defendants violated the obscenity law by transporting the film Deepthoart across interstate commerce lines

    Ruling: Film can be banned for its content.
  65. Lawrence V. Texas
    Facts: Lawrence and Garner were arrested and convicted of deviate sexual intercourse in violation of a Texas statute forbidding two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual conduct.

    Ruling: The Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual.
  66. Obscentiy tests 2
    Hicklin test: "whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences."

    Roth test: as material whose "dominant theme taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest" to the "average person, applying contemporary community standards.
Card Set
Poly Sci 412 final