Landmark Supreme Court Cases aka maybe the most valuable test prep you can do!
Below are the 42 Supreme Court Cases that you are responsible for. Some time in January we will have a 20 question quiz on Landmark Supreme Court Cases. These are the cases you are likely to see referenced on the AP Gov't test in May. In a group of 5 students, you will be responsible for posting content on 4 of these cases. When you post for each case here is what you need in very short notes:
1) Name of court case
2) Brief description of what happened
3) What part of the Constitution does it deal with (be specific)
Good - Amendment 1 Freedom of Religion Establishment clause
Bad - 6th Amendment
4) Most importantly What did the court rule!
Do a good timely job as your classmates are depending on you! (and I will be reading them too and sharing with the class whether they are reliable sources of info. Should be done by the time we return from winter break.
Mr. Thompson
APLG Landmark
Supreme Court Cases
1. Baker vs. Carr-1962
-
apportionment
2. Brown vs. Board of Education- 1954
-
school segregation
3. California vs. Acevedo-1991
-
searches of automobiles
4. California vs. Greenwood-1988
-
searches of garbage
5. Citizen’s United vs. FEC-2010
-campaign
finance
6. Cox vs. New Hampshire-1941
-public
demonstration
7. Cruzan vs. Director, Missouri Dep’t of Health-1990
-right
to die
8. Dred Scott vs. Sanford – 1857
-
rights of slaves
9. Edwards vs. Aguillard-1987
-public
school instruction
10. Engel vs. Vitale-1962
-school
prayer
11. Escobedo vs. Illinois-1964
-right
to legal counsel
12. Feiner vs. New York-1951
-free speech
13. Furman vs. Georgia-1972
-capital
punishment
14. Gibbons vs. Ogden-1824
-authority
of Congress
15. Gideon vs. Wainwright-1963
-right
to legal counsel
16. Gitlow vs. New York-1925
-free
speech
17. Grayned vs. City of Rockford-1972
-right
to assemble/protest
18. Gregg vs. Georgia-1976
-capital
punishment
19. Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier-1988
-censorship
of school newspapers
20. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. vs. United States-
1964
-discrimination
21. Jaffee vs. Redmond-1996
-doctor/patient
confidentiality
22. Katz vs. United States-1967
-search
and seizure
23. Marbury vs. Madison-1803
-judicial
review
24. McCulloch vs. Maryland-1819
-powers
of Congress
25. Miranda vs. Arizona-1966
-rights
if arrested
26. New Jersey vs. TLO-1985
-searches
in school
27. New York Times Co. vs. U.S.-1971
-freedom
of the press
28. Plessy vs. Ferguson-1896
-separate
but equal
29. Powell vs. Alabama-1932
-right
to legal counsel
30. Regents of the University of California vs.
Bakke-1978
-affirmative
action
31. Reno vs. American Civil Liberties Union-1997
-online
pornography
32. Reynolds vs. Sims-1964
-
representation in state legislatures
33. Rhodes vs. Chapman- 1981
-cruel
and unusual punishment
34. Roe vs. Wade-1973
-abortion
35. Schenck vs. United States-1919
-free
speech
36. Tinker vs. Des Moines School District-1969
-free
speech in schools
37. United States vs. Eichman-1990
-flag-burning
38. United States vs. Nixon-1974
-powers
of the president
39. Webster vs. Reproductive Health Services-1989
-abortion
40. West Virginia State Board of Education vs,
Barnette-1943
-rights
in school/pledge of allegiance
41. Whren vs. United States-1996
-searches
of automobiles
42. Woodson vs. North Carolina-1976
-capital
punishment
posted by erdecker @ 3:58 PM
35 comments
35 Comments:
1. Whren vs. US 1996
2. Whren was pulled over for a traffic violation. The officers claimed to have reasonable cause for conducting a search for drugs, in which they found a bag of cocaine. Whren claimed it was a violation of his 4th amendment for believing the officers had no reason to search in the first place.
3. Amendment 4: the right of people to be secure against unreasonable searches
4. The court ruled that the officers did have reasonable cause since Whren was speeding and failed to use turning signals. While the 4th amendment requires a balancing test between search and the harm it might cause the individual, the test only applies to unusually harmful searches. There was nothing unusually harmful about this traffic stop.
2. Whren was pulled over after speeding off from a stop sign and failed to use turning signals. After officers pulled him over they noticed a bag of cocaine in the front seat. Whren believed he should've only been pulled over for the traffic violation but the officers had probable cause for the search.
1. Engel vs. Vitale 1962
2. In some New York public schools, the recitation of a nondenominational prayer, from which students could abstain if they felt uncomfortable, was encouraged at the beginning of each school day. Engel challenged the constitutionality of this practice, saying that requiring a prayer in school was a violation of the establishment clause in the first amendment of the constitution. The opposing side argued that because the prayer was voluntary, the practice was not unconstitutional.
3. First Amendment; Establishment Clause and freedom of religion.
4. The court ruled that the promotion of any religious prayer in schools, regardless of being nondenominational and voluntary, is unconstitutional and a violation of the Establishment Clause. This practice counts as government promotion of religion, which the Establishment Clause is meant to prevent.
Haarini Sridhar said...
1) Brown v Board of Education
2) Filed against the Topeka, Kansas school board by representative-plaintiff Oliver Brown, whose child was denied access to Topeka's white schools. Brown claimed that this racial segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause but the federal district court dismissed this claim, saying the public schools were equal enough under the Plessy Doctrine.
3) Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment
4) Under the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that racial segregation of children in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause.
-Cruzan vs. Director, Missouri Department of Health
- The right to die
- argued: Dec. 6, 1989
- Decided: June 25, 1990
- Cruzan sustained severe injuries in a car accident and is in a vegetative state, meaning she has motor reflexes but has no indication of significant cognitive function. She is being kept alive by tubes and machines. Her parents, the copetitioners, requested they terminate her artificial care, which would result in her death. Hospital staff refused to do this without court approval. Cruzan told a housemate that she would not want to continue her life if she was left unable to live it at least halfway normally.
- right to privacy (fourth amendment)
- the right to refuse care (tenth amendment)
- At first the court agreed that a person in cruzans condition had the right to refuse care, but then reversed because she did not have a legal doctrine of informed consent to remove treatment and that her parents could not determine this for her without formalities of a living will that leaves the decision to them.
Jenifer Kulich
California V Greenwood
1. California V Greenwood
2. The police received a call that Greenwood was trafficking narcotics. The police had the janitor at Greenwood's apartment building separate Greenwood's garbage from the others garbage which had been already disposed of. Upon finding evidence of narcotics in Greenwood's garbage, the police obtained a warrant and searched Greenwood's house. Upon finding evidence of narcotics, they arrested Greenwood. This happens to Greenwood on one other occasion following his first arrest.
3. The Exclusionary Rule of the Fourth Amendment
4. The Supreme Court upheld that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit searches and seizures of garbage left for collection outside of ones home. The Court agreed that the police did obtain the evidence legally.
Megan McDevitt
1. Katz v. United States- 1967
2. Charles Katz took part in interstate gambling, and since it was illegal, he conducted his business in a public telephone booth, hoping to avoid detection. The FBI caught on to Katz's activities, so they bugged a telephone booth and incriminated him based on his recorded conversation. Katz wanted the evidence of the telephone conversation to be suppressed based on the 4th Amendment.
3. 4th Amendment- "unreasonable searches and seizures"
4. The Supreme Court ruled in Katz's favor, with the statement that the 4th Amendment "protects people, not places" and is not dependent on intrusion of physical spaces. A person may have a reasonable expectation of privacy even in public spaces, as when Katz entered the telephone booth, he sought to keep out the uninvited ear. Therefore, the government electronically listening to Katz's conversation constituted a search and seizure under the 4th Amendment, and since they had no warrant, all evidence obtained was inadmissible.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sam Jones
1. Citizens United vs. FEC -2010
2. In 2008, Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation created a documentary that was critical of Hillary Clinton, who was a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States. CU intended on releasing the film on television within the 30-day period of the Democratic primary elections. This form of support was considered to be a violation of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, specifically Section 441b, which prohibits corporations and unions from using general treasury funds to make independent expenditures for speech ("electioneering communication").
3. Amendment 1 - Freedom of Speech
4. It was held that political spending is a form of protected speech, so the ban on corporations' and labor unions' spending (not direct contributions) in form of ads, etc. was ruled unconstitutional.
1. Woodson vs North Carolina-1976
2. North Carolina passed legislation that made the death penalty mandatory for all convicted of first-degree murder. James Woodson was found guilty of 1st degree murder and challenged the automatic death sentence. The law was initially upheld by North Carolina's Supreme Court
3. 8th Amendment "Cruel and unusual punishments" clause. The Court's main section cited from the 8th Amendment was the "fundamental respect for humanity."
4. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Woodson, largely due to the unconstitutional nature of a blanket punishment for all offenses without consideration of unique circumstances.
1) Miranda v. Arizona
2) Ernesto Miranda was arrested for circumstantial evidence showing that he had kidnapped and raped someone. Following the arrest, police officers interrogated Miranda for two hours after which Miranda signed a confession. The confession was used to find Miranda guilty.
3) Fifth amendment, Self incrimination clause; Sixth Amendment, Right to an attorney
4) 5-4, The court ruled that the accused must be informed of their Miranda rights and know that they can use the rights at any point during an interview.
1) New Jersey v. TLO
2) A high school student (Tracy Lois Odem, referred to as TLO) was caught smoking a cigarette in the bathroom. The vice principal forced her to hand over her purse which was searched. Once a pack of cigarettes was found, the vice principal continued searching on the grounds that he found rolling papers. He found evidence of more illicit activities.
3) This case deals with the Fourth Amendment’s “unreasonable searches and seizures” clause. Specifically, it deals with how this clause applies with respect to school settings.
4) In a 6-3 ruling, the Court decided if there is “reasonable suspicion,” then school officials can continue with a search. In this case, given that she was caught smoking, it was reasonable to think she had cigarettes in her purse. When rolling papers were found without extra searching, the officials had “reasonable suspicion” to do a full search and use the evidence.
1) New York Times Co. v. U.S.
2) The New York Times and Washington Post began to publish illegally accessed classified documents from the Pentagon (the Pentagon Papers) involving information about the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. The newspapers received a court order to halt the publication of these papers on account of potentially threatening national security. This is the first issue of prior restraint involving national security
3) The first amendment freedom of the press clause
4) The Court ruled 6-3 that the use of prior restraint was unconstitutional and therefore allowed the New York Times and Washington Post to publish these papers.
1) Plessy v. Ferguson
2) Homer Plessy, a mixed male (1/8th African American), refused to sit in a segregated car which violated a state law in Louisiana. Plessy was then arrested and demanded a trial.
3) 13th Amendment, and Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment
4) The Supreme Court decided by a 7-1 vote that racial segregation laws in public facilities are legal and upheld the “separate but equal” doctrine.
1. Powell v Alabama - 1932
2. Nine black men were accused of raping two young white women. They were told that they couldn't hire lawyers and didn't have access to lawyers until shortly before the trial, so they had little to no time to plan a defense in the case. They appealed their convictions on the grounds that they didn't receive the proper legal counsel.
3. Amendment 6 - Right to a lawyer
4. Alabama Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that it was a fair trial
1. Regents of the University of California v Bakke - 1978
2. The Medical School of the University of California at Davis practiced a quota of minorities. This entailed having 16 of 100 accepted students be minorities. Allen Bakke, who was white, applied with MCAT and ACT scores that were much higher than some of the minorities given admission through the quota, but wasn't accepted because of it.
3. Amendment 14 - Equal protection clause
4. The court ruled that using race as a main requirement for admission is unconstitutional; however, using race along with many other criteria is constitutional.
1. Reno v American civil Liberties Union - 1997
2. The ACLU felt that the Communications Decency Act (An act that criminalized sensitive material, sexual or offensive, from the internet to protect minors) was unconstitutional and restricted First Amendment rights
3. Amendment 1 - Freedom of Speech
4. The court ruled that the Communications Decency Act was unconstitutional in few parts, but when it comes to obscenity or child pornography that should be criminalized.
1. Reynolds v Sims
2. Voter from Alabama challenged the provision in the Alabama Constitution that each county can only have one senator, causing disparities in population of as much as 41:1.
3. Amendment 14 - Equal protection clause
4. The court ruled that state legislatures had to be roughly the same population.
1.Grayned vs. City of Rockford-1972
2.Grayned participated in a demonstration. The demonstration violated Rockford's, Illinois anti-picketing and anti-noise ordinances. The demonstration pertained to the racial equality in education system and the noise caused students to jump up from their desks and watch from the windows
3.First Amendment - Protest demonstrations and other forms of protest based on First Amendment guarantees
4.The court ruled that the anti-picketing ordinance was not sufficiently restricted to a specific subject or purpose. Therefore, it invalidated that the anti-noise ordinance (prohibited only noise that took place near a public school that might disrupt school activity) was valid. Grayned's conviction under the anti-picketing ordinance was reversed while his conviction under the anti-noise ordinance was upheld.
Maddie Frick
1. Jaffee V. Redmond - 1996
2. In Illinois, Officer Redmond responded to a "flight in progress" call. When she arrived, many people were running out of the building including Ricky Allen, who was running out of the building chasing another man with a butcher knife. Allen repeatedly did not follow Redmonds orders to drop the weapon. Redmond shot Allen, he died at the scene. At trial Jaffee, administer for Ricky Allen, sought access to the notes from Redmond's counseling sessions from after the shooting. The Jury stated that the counseling conversations could not be viewed because of the psychotherapist-patient privilege. The district judge rejected this statement and stated that the jury's refusal to look at the notes had no "legal justification" and to suppose that the note contents were unfavorable toward Redmond. The jury awarded Jaffee $545,000 for her federal claim and state law claim. This case was reversed by the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The Court of Appeals stated that Illinois did adopt some form of psychotherapist-patient privilege before the incident happened. It stated that the need for the counseling notes was not needed in this case because of the numerous eyewitnesses.
3.Amendment 6- freedom to confidential communication between therapist and patient.
4. The Supreme Court ruled that Federal Rule of Evidence 501, which recognizes the psychotherapist-patient privilege protects Redmond's counseling conversations. It states that the District Court made a mistake by refusing to grant protection of the counseling conversations between Redmond and her therapist .
1. Gregg vs. Georgia-1976
2. Troy Leon Gregg was convicted of murder and armed robbery and was sentenced to death in the Georgia state court. The defense argued that the death penalty itself was a cruel and unusual punishment, and asked the Supreme Court to rule it as unconstitutional.
3. 8th Amendment – “Cruel and unusual punishment”.
4. The court ruled that the death penalty was constitutional in this case, since the system used to apply the death penalty was judicious and careful (unlike in Furman v. Georgia in 1972).
1. Marbury vs. Madison - 1803
2. William Marbury was appointed Justice of the Peace, along with many others, at the end of John Adam's presidency. Marbury and several others had not received their commissions by the time Thomas Jefferson became president. Under Jefferson's orders, James Madison refused to distribute the final commissions. Marbury and three others petitioned for a writ of mandamus to receive their commissions.
3. Article II section 2 of the Constitution - the president has the power to appoint and commission officers of the United States
4. John Marshall wrote out the Court's unanimous decision to deny the petition and refuse to issue the writ. They agreed that the Constitution ensured their right to receive their commissions but said that the Constitution did not give them the power to issue writs of mandamus, even though Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 permitted it. That section was declared unconstitutional and judicial review was established.
1. Gibbons vs. Ogden-1824
2. New York Legislature granted Aaron Ogden a monopoly license on steamship travel. Thomas Gibbons (steamboat owner/trader) was given federal permission to use the New York waterways, but had to pay extensive fees to operate his business. Gibbons sued Ogden, however New York courts continually ruled in Ogden's favor due to the monopoly license; the case was later decided by the Supreme Court that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution gave Congress power to regulate interstate commerce, including navigation of interstate seaways.
3. Tenth Amendment - Commerce Clause
4. The Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Commerce Clause outranked a state law that had granted a monopoly.
1. Edwards vs. Aguillard- 1987
2. Louisiana created a law that dictated that schools must teach creation science along with evolution theory, but the law was struck down as promoting one religion over another
3. First Amendment- Establishment clause
4. The Court ruled the law unconstitutional in a 7-2 decision
1. Escobedo vs. Illinois- 1964
2. Danny Escobedo was arrested as a suspect in a murder case; while he was being interrogated, he repeatedly asked to see his lawyer and his lawyer attempted to contact him, but the police refused to allow contact. Escobedo eventually confessed to the murder.
3. Sixth Amendment- right to a lawyer
4. The Court ruled that suspects have the right to counsel during interrogation in a 5-4 decision
Alyssa George
1.McCulloch vs. Maryland- 1819
2.This case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank. It brought up the issue of divisions of power between the states and Federal Government. Congress established the Second National Bank to help control unregulated currency by state banks. Maryland put a tax on all banks not chartered by the state including the Second National Bank. James McCulloch, cashier at Baltimore US bank, refused to pay the state tax, so Maryland filed a law suit against him.
3.Article 4- National Supremacy Clause
Article 1, section 8- Necessary and Proper Clause
4.The Court ruled that chartering a bank was an implied power of the Constitution under the elastic clause. It said that the Federal Government had the right and power to set up a Federal bank and that the states did not have the power to tax the Federal Government.
1. Feiner vs. New York-1951
2. Irving Feiner was arrested for a violation of section 722 of the New York Penal Code which forbids incitement of breach of peace as his speech to a mixed group of African Americans and Whites led to traffic and disruption on the street. His speech consisted of derogatory remarks and called for action against the Whites from the African Americans, and his third refusal to the police to stop petitioning led to his arrest.
3. First and Fourteenth Amendment - right to free speech
4. The court ruled in a 6-3 decision to uphold his arrest because they found Feiner's rights were not violated. The police arrested him because they thought a riot was going to occur; the police did not arrest Feiner based on his message but on the reaction from the crowd.
1. Tinker vs. Des Moines School District 1969
2. In 1969 during the Vietnam war, a group of students at a public school in Des Moines decided to have a silent protest against the war by wearing black arm bands to school. The principal found out about it and threatened to punish any student who wore a black arm band by suspending them. The students however still wore the arm bands and were suspended and their parents sued the school for violating the children's rights to free speech.
3. Freedom of Speech: First Amendment
4. The parents lost their cases in both their U.S. District Court and U.S. Court of Appeals but repealed it to the Supreme Court who ruled 7 to 2 on the side of the students stating that, Students don't shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates."
1) Schenck vs. United States 1919
2) Charles T. Schenck was a general secretary of the U.S. Socialist Party and opposed the military draft implemented in the U.S. Schenck released 15,000 flyers to convince members of military draft to resist military service and as a result, Schenck was arrested for violating the Espionage Act (crimes against U.S. Military by people who intend to interfere with military action and war effort). Schenck argued that the Espionage Act was unconstitutional since it took away his free speech guaranteed by the first amendment. The Supreme Court upheld the Espionage Act as any speech that causes a "clear and present danger" shall give congress the power to prevent such speech from the public.
3) 1st Amendment- Freedom of Speech
4) The Supreme Court ruled the Espionage Act constitutional because the Espionage Act prevents speech that causes "clear and present danger".
1. Rhodes vs. Chapman 1981
2. Kelly Chapman was a prisoner at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility, which was a high security prison. Chapman was celled with another inmate, since the prison was operating at 138% maximum capacity. Chapman filed a civil lawsuit declaring that "double celling" violated the 8th amendment. The two prisoners had go share 63 square feet. The U.S district court declared this unconstitutional stating that it violated the cruel and unusual punishment clause
3. 8th Amendment- cruel and unusual punishment, 14th Amendment- due process clause
4. However, once it made it to the Supreme Court, they deemed "double celling" as not violating the 8th amendment and was not cruel nor unusual.
1. Roe vs. Wade 1973
2. Roe v. Wade was just about a woman (Roe) who got pregnant and wanted an abortion but the state of Texas had a law that said that a woman can't have an abortion unless the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother so she sued the country district attorney Henry Wade and won the case
3. Court argued the 1st, 4th, 9th and 14th amendment but they primarily argued the right to privacy under due process clause of the 14th amendment.
4. Supreme Court said that it Texas law was unconstitutional
1) Baker vs Carr, 1962.
2) Despite significant population growth in urban areas (e.g. Memphis) in Tennessee, they remained underrepresented in their districts as they had the same representation in rural districts with significantly fewer residents.
3) 14th Amendment - Equal Protection Clause
4) The court ruled in a 6-2 decision that each vote should carry equal weight regardless of the voter’s place of residence. Thus Tennessee violated the equal protection clause (voters from urban areas suffered debasement of their votes).
1. California vs Acevedo, 1990
2. Charles Acevedo was spotted by Californian police entering a flat known to sell marijuana. When Acevedo left carrying a paper bag, approximately the size of the bag known by the police to hold the illegal substance, authorities stopped him when he was driving away. Without a warrant, they searched the car and discovered marijuana in the bag (hidden in his trunk).
3. Fourth Amendment - Unreasonable Search, Automobile Exception
4. In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that the "automobile exception" (instead of the Fourth Amendment's usual search-warrant) requirement is broad enough to cover a situation where the police only have probable cause to believe there is evidence in a specific container within the car (in this case, being the bag with dope in Acevedo's car).
1. Cox vs. New Hampshire 1941 -public demonstration
2. Petitioner: Willis Cox, Respondent: New Hampshire
Willis Cox and many others did not have the permit required by the state of New Hampshire when they decided to initiate an informational march carrying posters and handing out flyers. They were convicted for violating the statute prohibiting unlicensed parades. They were found guilty according to the Supreme Court of New Hampshire.
3. 1st Amendment (Freedom of Speech) is questioned whether or not this case violates it
4.Charles E. Hughes was Chief Justice at the time. The court ruled that nothing was seen as unfair in the case
1. Dred Scott vs. Sanford
2. Dred Scott, an enslaved man, was brought by his owners into a free state from a slave state, and he attempted to sue his owners for freedom.
3. 5th Amendment - Protection of Property
4. The court ruled: A slave is not a citizen, but property, so Dred Scott could not sue. Also since he and other slaves were considered property, they could not be taken from their slave-owners, thus Dred Scott was not considered free, despite being in a free state.
1. West Virginia State Board of Educations vs. Barnette (1943)
2. The West Virginia State Board of Education insisted that saluting the flag and pledging allegiance is necessary in all public schools. Teachers and students who failed to do this could be punished with charges or expulsion for insubordination. In 1940, Minersville School District v. Gobitis upheld the decision of a school district to expel two students for failing to salute the flag for religious reasons. The court overruled the court case in West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette, declaring it unconstitutional.
3. First Amendment - Freedom of Speech and religion
4. The court ruled 6-3 that forcing school aged children to salute the flag is a violation of freedom of speech and religion.
1. United States v. Eichman (1990)
2. Shawn Eichman set a flag on fire on the steps of the US Capitol building to protest the government's current policies. It was an argument as to whether the Flag Protection Act (a law against the desecration of the flag) was unconstitutional. Haggard, who also set a flag on fire, was prosecuted as well.
3. Amendment One Freedom of Speech Symbolic Speech
4. It was a 5-4 decision made that the Flag Protection Act violated the right of free speech and Flag burning is a form of expression protected under the First Amendment.
1. Unites States v. Nixon (1974)
2. Nixon attempted to use executive privilege to support his side of the case when he refused to release tapes that were requested and turned over by the special prosecutor of the Watergate scandal. The tapes were of Nixon and his advisers conversing in regards to the scandal.
3. Article II executive privilege - absolute power or limitations?
4. In an 8-0 ruling against Nixon, the court decided it executive privilege did not apply under the circumstances and Nixon should have released the recordings.
1. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)
2. The state of Missouri passed legislation to place restrictions on abortion. The limitations include banning state facilities, money, and employees from contributing to abortions where the mother's life is not in danger as well as advocating for life beginning at conception. It was questioned whether or not the legislation violated Roe v. Wade and the right to privacy. Reproductive Health Services also argued that the preamble stated that life begins at conception.
3. 14th Amendment - Equal Protection Clause, fourth amendment - privacy, Roe v. Wade,
4. In a divided 5-4 ruling, the Court declared that Missouri's legislation did not violate the Constitution, deciding that withholding public funding and prohibiting counseling by public employees before the abortion process are not out of Constitutional boundaries.
1.Furman vs. Georgia-1972
2.Furman was burglarizing a home. A family member found him and Furman attempted to flee the scene, but tripped and fell. This caused the gun he was carrying to go off which killed one of the residence of the home. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to death.
3.The eight and fourteenth Amendment which deals with cruel and unusual punishment
4.The death penalty in this case was deemed as cruel and unusual punishment which violates the constitution.
1) California vs. Acevedo- 1991
2) The police used probable cause to search Charles Acevedo's car because the police believed the car had marijuana in it based on the fact that they had previously seen him go into a house and come out with what they believed was marijuana.
3) 4th Amendment- searches and seizures(may police conduct a warrant-less search of a container within an automobile if they have probable cause to believe that the container holds evidence)
4) The police may search an automobile and the containers within it where they have probable cause to believe contraband or evidence is contained- don't need a warrant just probable cause.
1. Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier - 1988 - censorship of school newspapers
2. Students enrolled in Journalism 2 class at Hazelwood and were responsible for writing and editing the school paper. Divorce article written blamed a girl's father's actions, pregnancy article featured stories of pregnant students at the school. Principle felt it was inappropriate & prohibited them from being published.
3. First Amendment: Right of Freedom of Speech
4. District court of Missouri ruled their rights had not been violated; students appealed to U.S. Court of Appeals which reversed the ruling; school appealed to U.S. Supreme Court, granted certiorari. Concluded it does not violate their rights due to the fact that the paper was sponsored by school.
1) Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. vs. United States - 1964
2) The Heart of Atlanta Motel in Georgia, refused to accept Black Americans and was charged with violating Title II.
3) 5th Amendment- protects a person from becoming a witness against himself in a criminal case
Civil Rights Act of 1964-outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
13th Amendment- slavery should not exist in the U.S.
4) The Commerce Clause allowed Congress to regulate local incidents of commerce. The United States countered that the restrictions requiring African Americans to stay within the motel were related to interstate travel. It further argued that the 5th Amendment does not forbid reasonable regulation of interstate commerce, and that the damage did not constitute the taking of property without compensation or due process of law. Congress found the 13th Amendment did not restrain civil rights because the business was affected by the interstate commerce.
1. Gideon V. Wainwright
2. Gideon was seen breaking and burgelrizing a pool room. He was then convicted, he asked for a attorny in a state court. The court denied him the right to an attonry since it is not a capital offense or in a surpreme court. he was unable to afford an attorny on his own.
3. it violated the 6th amendment Rights in Trial
4. the court ruled in Gideons favor, making it that states are required to provied an attorny to those who commmited a serious offense and are unable to provied them from thier own.
1) Gitlow V. New York
2) Benjamin Gitlow was charged with criminal anarchy for publishing “Left Wing Manifesto.” Gitlow argued that the document was an “analysis” rather than an “advocacy,” but as a member of the Socialist Party of America and under the Red Scare climate, his argument was not convincing. He was convicted for his action.
3) First Amendment-Freedom of Speech
4) 7-2 favoring the conviction. The court ruled that the First Amendment does not protect the advocating for overthrow of the government.
(The manifesto is linked if you'd like to see it.)
Post a Comment
<< Home