Download Court Case - Caldwell County Schools

SUPREME COURT CASES













Marbury v. Madison (1803)
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Schenck v. United States (1919)
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Engel v. Vitale (1962)
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US (1964)
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)











Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
NY Times v. United States (1971)
Furman v Georgia (1972)
Roe v. Wade (1973)
United States v. Nixon (1974)
Gregg v Georgia (1976)
Regents of the University of
California v. Bakke (1978)
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)
Bethel School District v Fraser
(1986)
Hazelwood School District v.
Kuhlmeier (1988)
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Marbury v Madison (1803)
Issue: Separation of Power
Court Case: Marbury sued Madison because he did not
receive commission to be a justice of the peace.
Marbury asked the Supreme Court to issue an order
to force Madison to give him his commission.
Court Ruling: Against Marbury. Ruled a portion of the
Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional. 1st act of
Congress to be declared unconstitutional.
Precedent: established judicial review – power of the court
to decide whether actions of Congress are
constitutional.
McCulloch v Maryland (1819)
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Issue: Federalism (State v. Federal Government)
Court Case: McCulloch was a branch manager for the Bank of the
United States. Refused to pay a tax to the state of Maryland and was
arrested. He appealed conviction on the grounds that a state could
not tax the federal government.
Court Ruling: In favor of McCulloch.
Precedent: States cannot tax the federal government.
Dred Scott v Sanford (1857)
Issue: 5th Amendment, Slavery, Missouri Compromise of 1820
Court Case: Dred Scott sued his owner Sanford because he had been
taken into free territory. Scott thought that due to the Missouri
Compromise Line which made slavery illegal in certain areas of
the country, he had become free.
Court Ruling: Court ruled in favor of Sanford. 1) Slaves were
considered property, thus did not have the right to sue in court. 2)
Would deprive owner of 5th Amendment due process rights if he
were stripped of property.
Precedent: Missouri Compromise was ruled unconstitutional, slaves
could not sue for freedom.
Plessy v Ferguson (1896)
Issue: 14th Amendment (Equal Protection)
Court Case: Herman Plessy, 1/8 black, challenged a
Louisiana law that mandated separate railroad cars
for blacks and whites. Plessy sat on a car designated
to whites and was arrested.
Court Decision: In favor of Louisiana law. Was not
ruled a violation of the 14th Amendment, equal
protection clause.
Precedent: Separate but equal constitutional. Led to
an increase of segregation particularly in southern
states.
Schenck v US (1919)
Issue: 1st Amendment – Times of War
Court Case: Schenck circulated a flyer during World War I
urging people to dodge the draft. Citing the draft as a
violation of the 13th Amendment (involuntary servitude).
Schenck was arrested under terms of the Espionage Act
of 1917. Schenck appealed conviction on grounds that
his 1st Amendment right had been violated.
Court Ruling: In favor of the United States. Urging citizens
to break the law, and posed a threat to security of the
nation if successful (clear and present danger).
Precedent: 1st Amendment rights, as well as others can be
limited during times of war.
Korematsu v US (1944)
Issue: 5th & 14th Amendment – Times of War
Court Case: During World War II, the US military issued
an order to place Japanese Americans in internment
camps. Korematsu sued the US government on the
grounds that it was a violation of 5th Amendment due
process, and the 14th Amendment.
Court Ruling: In favor of the United States government.
Precedent: During times of war, certain group’s rights can
be limited. (Clear & Present Danger Rule)
Brown v Board of Education (1954)
Issue: 14th Amendment – Equal Protection (Separate but
Equal)
Court Case: Brown sued the Board of Education of
Topeka, Kansas because his daughter had to walk
seven blocks to catch a bus to a segregated school
when there was a school within six blocks of her house.
This was part of a class action suit against the Board
of Education.
Court Ruling: The court ruled separate educational
facilities were inherently unequal. The ruling in this
case led to the beginning of the Civil Rights
Movement, and began the end of segregation.
Overturned the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson.
Precedent: Separate but Equal is unconstitutional.
Mapp v Ohio (1961)
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Issue: 4th Amendment (Search & Seizure)
Court Case: Police in Cleveland, Ohio believed a fugitive was
being kept by Mapp in her home. The police came to her
house demanding entrance, Mapp refused because they did
not have a warrant. Later police came back, broke into her
home, and produced a fake warrant. They did not find the
fugitive, but did find pornographic materials. She was
arrested and convicted. Mapp appealed the decision as a
violation of the 4th Amendment.
Court Ruling: The court ruled in favor of Mapp.
Precedent: Illegal evidence cannot be used in court.
Engel v Vitale (1962)
Issue: 1st Amendment – Freedom of Religion/Separation of
Church and State
Court Case: Students in New York State were reciting a
prayer to begin the school day. Even though students were
not required to recite the prayer, parents felt this was a
violation of the 1st Amendment.
Court Ruling: The court ruled that this was a violation of the
establishment clause because it was a prayer, and it was
being recited in a public school.
Precedent: School prayer is unconstitutional.
Gideon v Wainwright (1963)
Issue: 6th Amendment, 14th Amendment
Court Case: Gideon was arrested for burglary of a Florida
pool hall. He appeared in court and asked that an attorney
be appointed to him. The court denied the request on the
grounds that under Florida law, only a person accused of a
capital crime received a court appointed attorney.
Court Decision: The court ruled in favor of Gideon, stating
that Florida had violated the 6th Amendment and 14th
Amendment, equal protection clause.
Precedent: Indigent defendants (cannot afford an attorney)
must be provided counsel in all felony cases.
Escobedo v Illinois (1964)
Issue: 5th & 6th Amendment
Court Case: Escobedo and another man, Benedict
DiGerlando were interrogated by police in connection
with a murder. DiGerlando told police that Escobedo
committed the murder. During the interrogation,
Escobedo asked to have an attorney, and his attorney
asked to speak with Escobedo, the police denied both
claims. Eventually Escobedo was able to confront
DiGerlando, and told police that it was DiGerlando who
committed the murder, by doing so he admitted to being
an accomplice and was convicted. He appealed the
conviction because he was denied the right to speak with
his attorney.
Court Ruling: In favor of Escobedo.
Precedent: Illegal confessions cannot be used in court.
Heart of Atlanta Motel v US (1964)
Issue: 5th Amendment, Interstate Commerce, & Segregation
Court Case: The Heart of Atlanta Motel sued the US government over the
Constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Heart of Atlanta Motel
wanted to continue not allowing Blacks to stay at the Motel.
Court Ruling: The court ruled in favor of the US and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The court ruled that the interstate commerce clause allowed the US to ban the
motel’s discriminatory practice due to the fact that more than ½ of the motel’s
business came from out of state.
Precedent: Allowed the Federal Government
to stop discrimination through use of the
interstate commerce clause.
Miranda v Arizona (1966)
Issue: 5th & 6th Amendment
Court Case: Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape.
Miranda confessed to the crime, but was not told of his
Constitutional rights prior to the interrogation. Miranda
appealed the conviction on the grounds that the police had
violated his rights by not informing him.
Court Ruling: In favor of Miranda. The police had violated his
rights. Police are required to read the “Miranda Warnings”. Tell
suspects of their right to remain silent, to have an attorney, etc…
Precedent: Police must inform suspects of their 5th & 6th Amendment
rights prior to questioning.
Tinker v Des Moines (1969)
Issue: 1st Amendment – Freedom of Speech/Expression
Court Case: Three students wore armbands with a peace sign on
them to school as a form of protest against the escalating
violence in Vietnam. The students were told to remove the
armbands, they refused, and were suspended from school
until they returned without the armbands. The parents filed a
lawsuit against the school system for this action stating that it
violated the 1st Amendment.
Court Ruling: The court ruled in favor of the students. The
court stated that schools could establish dress codes, but
neede3d to show that a reasonable disruption is being caused
to the learning environment to ban items. In this case, the
school could not show this.
Precedent: Schools must show a reasonable disruption to
learning environment. Upheld 1st Amendment rights of
students.
NY Times v US (1971)
Issue: 1st Amendment (Freedom of the Press)
Court Case: During US involvement in Vietnam, the Pentagon put
together a paper which outlined US decision-making in Vietnam.
This classified document was leaked to the NY Times and the
Washington Post. The NY Times began publishing the findings,
but the government filed an injunction to stop the paper from
printing. The NY Times sued on the grounds that it violated the
1st Amendment.
Court Ruling: The court ruled in favor of the NY Times. The court
state that it was the right of the paper to print this material
because they had received the information legally.
Precedent: Prior restraint is unconstitutional. Government must be
able to prove a “clear and present danger”.
Furman v Georgia (1972)
Issue: 8th & 14th Amendment (Death Penalty)
Court Case: William Furman was burglarizing a house when the victim
woke up. Furman shot the victim, but said it was an accident. Because
he was committing a felony and committed murder, the State of
Georgia sentenced him to death.
Court Ruling: Furman appealed his sentence because he thought it was a
violation of the 8th Amendment against cruel & unusual punishment.
Court ruled in favor of Furman overturning the death penalty.
Precedent: Death penalty ruled cruel &
unusual punishment. Capital punishment must
be specifically identified by the law.
Roe v Wade (1973)
Issue: 9th & 14th Amendment
Court Case: Texas law did not allow women to have abortion
unless advised by a doctor because woman’s life was in
jeopardy. “Jane Roe” class action lawsuit questioned the
constitutionality of the law.
Court Ruling: The court ruled in favor of Roe. Stated that
states cannot pass laws banning abortion during the 1st
trimester (3 months).
Precedent: States cannot ban abortion during the 1st trimester.
US v Nixon (1974)
Issue: Separation of Power – Checks & Balances
Court Case: During the presidential election of 1972, a group of
members of C.R.E.E.P. broke into DNC headquarters. During
investigation, President Nixon was linked to the group, and a
court issued a subpoena for Nixon to turn over audiotapes of
White House proceedings. Nixon refused citing executive
privilege.
Court Ruling: Does executive privilege exist? Yes
What is its definition? President can keep information if it is a
matter of national security.
In this case, executive privilege did not apply. Nixon eventually
resigned from office.
Precedent: Executive Privilege exists, must show national security.
Gregg v Georgia (1976)
Issue: 8th & 14th Amendments (Cruel & Unusual Punishment)
Court Case: Troy Leon Gregg and another hitchhiker committed murder
and armed robbery. He was sentenced to death in Georgia, and
appealed the conviction on the grounds that it violated the 8th
Amendment.
Court Ruling: The court ruled against Gregg, stating the Georgia law did
not violate the 8th Amendment.
Precedent: Capital punishment is upheld as a punishment for certain
types of crime.
Regents of U Cal v Bakke (1978)
Issue: 14th Amendment (Equal Protection)
Court Case: Bakke applied for admission to the University of
California at Davis Medical School. The school admitted 100
students per year. 84 spots were open to all people, 16 were for
minorities, or economically disadvantaged people. (Affirmative
Action) Bakke (white) was denied admission, but was more
qualified than many of the 16
minority
applicants. Bakke sued
because of the school’s
admission
policy.
Court Ruling: In favor of Bakke.
Precedent: Affirmative Action cases
would be decided on a case by case
basis.
New Jersey v T.L.O. (1985)
Issue: 4th Amendment (Search & Seizure)
Court Case: T.L.O. was accused of smoking in the bathroom at
a high school. She denied and her purse was searched.
School officials found cigarettes, rolling papers, marijuana,
numerous $1 bills, and a list of students who owed her money.
T.L.O. appealed her expulsion on the grounds that her 4th
Amendment rights had been violated.
Court Decision: The court ruled in favor of the school. The
court stated that the need to keep guns and drugs out of
school created a situation that school officials should be given
greater latitude in searches.
Precedent: Reasonable Suspicion Rule for school searches.
Limited the 4th Amendment rights of students.
Bethel School District v Fraser (1986)
Issue: 1st Amendment (Freedom of Speech in School)
Court Case: Matthew Fraser gave a speech endorsing a fellow student for
an elected office. During the speech he made comments using an
explicit sexual metaphor. He was suspended for three days, and denied
the right to speak at graduation.
Court Ruling: Fraser appealed the ruling as a violation of his 1st
Amendment Rights. The court ruled in favor of the school, and the
right to ban certain speech.
Precedent: 1st Amendment rights to freedom of
speech can be limited if school can show a
reasonable disruption to the learning environment.
Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier (1988)
Issue: 1st Amendment (Freedom of the Press)
Court Case: A group of former high school students
filed suit against a principal and school system
because the principal had deleted an article about
teenage pregnancy and divorce from the school
newspaper.
Court Decision: The court ruled in favor of the
principal. The principal has the right to edit the
newspaper, and delete materials that he/she is
inappropriate to maintain the educational
environment.
Precedent: 1st Amendment rights of students limited.
Texas v Johnson (1989)
Issue: 1st Amendment & Flag Burning
Court Case: In 1984 the Republican Party held the National
Convention in Dallas, Texas. Many groups staged protests. As
a part of the protests, Johnson set fire to an American Flag, and
was arrested s Texas had a law banning the burning of the
Texas State Flag, and the US Flag. Johnson appealed on the
grounds that the law violated his 1st Amendment rights.
Court Ruling: In favor of Johnson. As a result, some groups
would like to add a Constitutional Amendment to ban flag
burning as a form of protest.
Precedent: Flag burning protected by the 1st Amendment.