* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Supreme Court Decisions - Senior
Survey
Document related concepts
Polish Constitutional Court crisis, 2015 wikipedia , lookup
R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union wikipedia , lookup
First Amendment to the United States Constitution wikipedia , lookup
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution wikipedia , lookup
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Supreme Court Decisions Marbury v. Madison. 1803 Reason: William Marbury, a Judicial appointee of John Adams was refused his appointment by T. Jefferson’s Secretary of State James Madison Judgment: Marbury, Madison’s refusal was illegal, the appointment had been made legally by Adams. Significance: It also ruled that it’s own power to issue legal writs of mandamus was unconstitutional. Established the precedent of Judicial review McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819 Reason: When the U.S. branch bank in Baltimore refused to pay taxes, Maryland brought suit for collection from the bank Judgment: McCulloch - The chartering of a bank, was a power implied from the power over federal fiscal operations. The state cannot impede federal laws, the tax was voted unconstitutional Significance- It set the precedent for a broad interpretation of the powers of the federal government Dred Scott v. Sanford, 1857 Reason: Dred Scott sued his master for freedom, after his family had traveled into a free section of Louisiana. Judgment: Sanford As an African-American Scott could not sue because he was not a citizen. Significance: Declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional- it violated the 5th Amendment by depriving slave owners of their property Bradwell v. Illinois, 1873 Reason Myra Bradwell asserted her right to a license to practice law in Illinois by virtue of her status as a United States citizen. The judges of the Illinois Supreme Court denied her application. Judgment- Illinois Significance- The right to practice law is not a constitutionally protected right. Justice Bradley went beyond the constitutional explanations of the case to describe the reasons why it was natural and proper for women to be excluded from the legal profession. Reynolds v. United States, 1879 Reason: George Reynolds was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, charged with bigamy after marrying two women at the same time in the Utah Territory. Judgment- The United States Significance: The Supreme Court recognized that under the First Amendment, the Congress cannot pass a law that prohibits the free exercise of religion. However it argued that the law prohibiting bigamy did not fall under this. Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896 Reason: Homer Plessy was arrested after he refused to move to a “colored” train car after purchasing a first class ticket. Judgment: Ferguson, The 14th Amendment did not protect African Americans from private citizens. Significance- Established the “separate but equal” clause that allowed segregation in the U.S. Weeks v. United States, 1914 Reason- Police entered the home of Fremont Weeks and seized papers which were used to convict him of transporting lottery tickets through the mail. This was done without a search warrant. Judgment- Weeks Significance- The Court held that the seizure of items from Weeks' residence directly violated his constitutional rights. The Court also held that the government's refusal to return Weeks' possessions violated the Fourth Amendment. Schenck v. United States, 1919 Reason: Charles Schenck was arrested for mailing materials urging draftees to avoid military service, under the Espionage Act created during WWI. Judgment: United States Significance; Schenck’s actions were a “clear and present danger” in a time of war. Defined the parameters of speech during a time of war. Gitlow v. New York, 1925 Reason: Gitlow was arrested for distributing Communist pamphlets advocating the overthrow of the government. Judgment: New York, Gitlow did not have 14th amendment protection, because he broke a state law that made invoking violence against the government a crime. Significance: Set the precedent for the future expansion of the freedom of speech Near v. Minnesota, 1931 Reason- Jay Near published a scandal sheet in Minneapolis, in which he attacked local officials, charging that they were implicated with gangsters. Minnesota officials obtained an injunction to prevent Near from publishing his newspaper under a state law that allowed such action against periodicals. Judgment- Near Significance The Court held that the statute authorizing the injunction was unconstitutional as applied. The Court established the doctrine that, with some narrow exceptions, the government could not censor or otherwise prohibit a publication in advance. Scottsboro Boys v. Alabama, 1932 Reason: Nine black teenagers, none older than nineteen, were accused of raping two white women on a train. The defendants were sentenced to death, despite the fact that one of the women later denied being raped Judgment: Scottsburo Boys Significance- In two separate cases, the Court ruled that the defendants were denied the right to counsel, which violated their right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, and that the exclusion of blacks from the grand jury which issued the indictment violated the Boys' Fourteenth Amendment rights. Hirabayashi v. United States, 1943 Reason: Gordon Kiyoshi Hirabayashi, a student at the University of Washington, was convicted of violating a curfew and relocation order. Judgment- For the US. The Court found the President's orders and the implementation of the curfew to be constitutional. Significance- racial discrimination was justified since "in time of war residents having ethnic affiliations with an invading enemy may be a greater source of danger than those of a different ancestry." Kunz v. New York, 1951 Reason: Kunz was was convicted for holding a religious meeting on the city streets without a permit in violation of N.Y city code. Judgment: Kunz Significance: this Court, interpreted the restrictive action of the state authorities as violating the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment in that such action disadvantaged Kunz because of his religious beliefs Brown v. Board of Education, 1954 Reason: 5 African American families sued the Topeka School board for unequal facilities Judgment: For Brown, segregated schools were not equal, and discriminated against people of color. Significance: Overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, segregation was declared unconstitutional Mapp v. Ohio, 1961 Reason: Mapp was arrested by police for obscene photos taken from his house in a search without a warrant Judgment: For Mapp, the search was unconstitutional Significance: Evidence found in an illegal search and seizure cannot be used. Baker v. Carr, 1962 Reason-Charles W. Baker and other Tennessee citizens alleged that a 1901 law designed to apportion the seats for the state's General Assembly was virtually ignored. Judgment- Baker Significance the Court held that the Supreme Court did have jurisdiction over questions of legislative apportionment Engel v. Vitale, 1962 The Board of Regents for the State of New York authorized a short, nondenominational voluntary prayer for recitation at the start of each school day. Judgment Engel Conclusion Neither the prayer's nondenominational character nor its voluntary character saves it from unconstitutionality. By providing the prayer, New York officially approved religion. This was the first case in which the Court used the establishment clause to eliminate religious activities as part of public ceremonies. Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963 Reason: Clarence Gideon was arrested for burglary, asked for attorney because he was poor, the court refused his request. Judgment: For Gideon - all defendants must have access to counsel. Significance: Overturned an earlier decision the precedent that only death penalty cases required automatic counsel. Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan, 1964 Reason: Alabama police commissioner L.B. Sullivan sued the N.Y. times for libel for ads placed by two civil rights organizations. Judgment: Against Sullivan- the major role of the press is a watchdog of public officials. Significance- Public officials who were the target of false statements could not sue unless they could prove that the statement was made with knowledge it was false or disregard whether it was false or not. Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965 Reason Griswold was the Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. Griswold and her colleague were convicted under a Connecticut law which criminalized the provision of counseling, and other medical treatment, to married persons for purposes of preventing conception. Judgment: Griswold Significance Through the Court, the various guarantees within the Bill of Rights create penumbras (zones) that establish a right to privacy. Together, the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments, create a new constitutional right, the right to privacy in marital relations. The Connecticut law conflicted with the exercise of this right. Miranda v. Arizona. l966 Reason: Ernesto Miranda was arrested on rape and kidnapping charges, he signed a confession without being informed of his right to counsel or right to remain silent Judgment- Miranda- Police had failed to follow the 5th Amendment Significance- Police officials must inform suspects of their constitutional rights when arresting them. Sheppard v. Maxwell, 1966 Reason- Convicted of second-degree murder for the bludgeoning death of his pregnant wife, Samuel Sheppard challenged the verdict as the product of an unfair trial. Sheppard, who maintained his innocence of the crime, alleged that the trial judge failed to protect him from the massive, widespread, and prejudicial publicity that attended his prosecution. Judgment: Shepard Significance- the Court found that Sheppard did not receive a fair trial. Although freedom of expression should be given great latitude, the Court held that it must not be so broad as to divert the trial away from adjudicating both criminal and civil matters in an objective, calm, and solemn courtroom setting. Loving v. Virginia, 1967 Reason: Two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia. The couple was then charged with violating the state's antimiscegenation statute Judgment: Loving Significance: the Court held that distinctions drawn according to race were generally "odious to a free people" and were subject to "the most rigid scrutiny" under the Equal Protection Clause Epperson v. Arkansas, 1968 Reason: The Arkansas legislature passed a law prohibiting teachers in public or state-supported schools from teaching, or using textbooks that teach, human evolution, because it violated the beliefs of Fundamentalist Christians. Epperson, a public school teacher, sued, claiming the law violated her First Amendment right to free speech as well as the Establishment Clause. Judgment Epperson Significance: This use of state power to prohibit the teaching of material objectionable to a particular sect amounted to an unconstitutional Establishment of religion. United States v. O’Brien, 1968 Reason:David O'Brien burned his draft card at a Boston courthouse. He said he was expressing his opposition to war. He was convicted under a federal law that made the destruction or mutilation of drafts card a crime. Judgment: The United States Significance- The Court established a test to determine whether governmental regulation involving symbolic speech was justified. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 1969 Reason: Three students decided to protest the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to their Des Moines schools during the Christmas holiday season.. Fearing that the armbands would provoke disturbances, the principals of Des Moines' school districts resolved that all students wearing armbands be asked to remove them or face suspension. When they wore their armbands to school, they were asked to remove them. When they refused, they were suspended until after New Year's Day. Judgment: Tinker Significance: The wearing of armbands was "closely akin to 'pure speech'" and protected by the First Amendment. School environments imply limitations on free expression, but here the principals lacked justification for imposing any such limits. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971 In Pennsylvania, a statute provided financial support for teacher salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials for secular subjects to non-public schools. The Rhode Island statute provided direct supplemental salary payments to teachers in non-public elementary schools. Each statute made aid available to "church-related educational institutions. Judgment: Lemon Significance: The Court found that the subsidization of parochial schools furthered a process of religious inculcation, and that the "continuing state surveillance" necessary to enforce the specific provisions of the laws would inevitably entangle the state in religious affairs. New York Times Company v. United States, 1971 Reason The 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. The President argued that prior restraint was necessary to protect national security. Judgment: New York Times Significance: the Court held that the government did not overcome the "heavy presumption against" prior restraint of the press in this case Muhammad Ali v. United States, 1971 Reason When Cassius Clay refused to report for induction, he was tried and convicted of willful refusal to submit to induction, even though he had previously claimed and been refused contentious objector status. Judgment- For Clay- Significance- the Court held that since the Appeal Board gave no reason for the denial of a conscientious objector exemption to Clay, Clay's conviction must be reversed. Helped clarify the status of contentious objector status under the 1st Amendment Eisenstadt v. Baird, 1972 Reason: William Baird gave away contraceptives to an unmarried woman. Massachusetts charged Baird with a felony, to distribute contraceptives to unmarried men or women. Under the law, only married couples could obtain contraceptives; only registered doctors or pharmacists could provide them. Baird was not an authorized distributor of contraceptives. Judgment: Eisenstadt Significance: The Court held that the law's distinction between single and married individuals failed to satisfy the "rational basis test" of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 1972 Reason: Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, both members of the Old Order Amish religion, were prosecuted under a Wisconsin law that required all children to attend public schools until age 16. The parents refused to send their children after the eighth grade, arguing that high school attendance was contrary to their religious beliefs. Judgment For Yoder Significance- individual's interests in the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment outweighed the State's interests in compelling school attendance beyond the eighth grade. Roe et al v. Wade, 1973 • Reason: The arrest of Roe, an unmarried woman from Texas, where abortion was illegal • Judgment For Roe- • Significance- The Court ruled that a woman has the right to an abortion without interference from the government in the first trimester of pregnancy, contending that it is part of her “right to privacy.” The Court granted states the right to intervene in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. Legalized abortion and is at the center of the current controversy between “pro-life” and “prochoice” advocates.. Miller v. California, 1973 Reason- Miller, after conducting a mass mailing campaign to advertise the sale of "adult" material, was convicted of violating a California statute prohibiting the distribution of obscene material. Judgment- California Significance the Court held that obscene materials did not enjoy First Amendment protection. The Court modified the test for obscenity. Obscene materials cannot be openly mailed without prior agreement. Nixon v. United States, 1974 Reason- The special prosecutor for the Watergate Investigation subpoenaed tapes from President Nixon. Nixon asserted that he was immune from the subpoena claiming "executive privilege,“ Judgment- For United States Significance- The Court held that neither the separation of powers, nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified, presidential privilege. The release of the tapes forced Nixon to resign from office, Lau v. Nichols, 1974 Reason: In San Francisco, Chinese-American students were receiving instructions in a language they did not understand, English. The school district did respond by providing one-hour per day ESL classes for these students, not every student was provided with this service Ruling For Lau, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco school system violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by denying non-English speaking students a meaningful opportunity to participate in the public educational program. Significance: Primary Language Classes in schools were created. Corning v. Brennan, 1974 Reason: Men at the Corning Glass Works were being paid more than women. Ruling: For Brennan, Significance: Employers cannot justify paying women lower wages because that is what they traditionally received under the "going market rate.“ Under the law, women are to be paid the same as men. Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 1975 Reason: Martin Cohn was the father of a seventeen- year old girl who was raped and killed in Georgia. A TV station broadcast the name of Cohn's daughter in connection with the incident. This violated a Georgia privacy statute which prevented the media from publicizing the names or identities of rape victims. Judgment: For Cox Broadcasting, Significance: the Georgia law restricted freedom of the press. Crime victims names are frequently released to the public. Califano v. Goldfarb, 1977 Reason: In the Social Security Act, women would be paid full death benefits, men were not. Judgment: For Califano, Significance: it violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause Both men and women are now paid the same death benefits for S.S. Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke, 1978 • Reason: The University of Calif., Davis, Medical School vs. Allan Bakke, a white applicant who was rejected twice even though there were minority applicants admitted with significantly lower scores than his • Judgment- For Bakke- • Significance- The Court ruled that while race was a legitimate factor in school admissions, the use of rigid quotas was not permissible. Affirmative action was unfair if it lead to reverse discrimination. Board of Education v. Pico, 1982 Reason: The Island Trees Union Free School District's Board of Education acting contrary to the recommendations of a committee of parents and school staff, ordered that certain books be removed from its district's junior high and high school libraries. In support of its actions, the Board said such books were: "anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and just plain filthy." Steven Pico brought suit in federal district court challenging the Board's decision to remove the books. Judgment: Pico Significance: The Court held that as centers for inquiry and the spread of information and ideas, school libraries enjoy a special affinity with the rights of free speech and press. The Board could not restrict the availability of books in its libraries simply because its members disagreed with their idea content. New Jersey v. T.L.O. 1984 Reason- T.L.O. was a fourteen-year-old; she was accused of smoking in the girls' bathroom of her high school. A principal at the school questioned her and searched her purse, yielding a bag of marijuana and other drug paraphernalia. Judgment- New Jersey, Significance- Citing the peculiarities associated with searches on school grounds, the Court abandoned its requirement that searches be conducted only when a "probable cause" exists that an individual has violated the law. the principal had found rolling paper in the girl’s purse, which gave him reasonable suspicion to continue the search. Johnson v. Santa Clara County, California, 1987 Reason: The Transportation Agency, Santa Clara, California promoted Diane Joyce to road dispatcher over Paul Johnson. Both candidates were qualified for the job. As an affirmative action employer, the Agency took into account the sex of the applicants in making the promotion decision. Judgment: Santa Clara County Significance: The Court affirmed the promotion procedures of the Agency. Justice Brennan argued that it was not unreasonable to consider sex as one factor among many in making promotion decisions, and that the Agency's actions did not create an absolute barrier to the advancement of men Cipollone v. Liggett Group, 1988 Reason: Rose Cipollone began smoking in 1942 and who died of lung cancer in 1984. Her son claimed cigarette companies are responsible for her death because failed to warn consumers about the hazards of smoking in their advertising, the cigarette companies claimed they did not have to warn her because they were not allowed to advertise after Federal law was passed. Judgment: Cipollone, Significance: Consumers can sue cigarette companies. DeShaney v. Winnebago, 1989 Reason: In 1984, four-year-old Joshua DeShaney became comatose and then profoundly retarded due to traumatic head injuries inflicted by his father. The Winnebago County Department of Social Services took various steps to protect the child after receiving numerous complaints of the abuse; however, the Department did not act to remove Joshua from his father's custody. Joshua DeShaney's mother subsequently sued the Department of Social Services, alleging that they had deprived the child of his "liberty interest in bodily integrity, in violation of his rights under the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause, by failing to intervene to protect him. Judgment: For Winnebago Significance: The Due Process Clause does not impose a special duty on the State to provide services to the public for protection against private actors if the State did not create those harms. Eichman v. United States, 1990 Reason- In 1989, Congress passed the Flag Protection Act which made it a crime to destroy an American flag or any likeness of an American flag which may be "commonly displayed." The law did, however, allow proper disposal of a worn or soiled flag. Eichman set a flag ablaze on the steps of the U.S. Capitol while protesting the government's domestic and foreign policy Judgment- Eichman Significance- the 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. Cruzan v. Missouri, 1990 Reason: In 1983, Nancy Beth Cruzan was involved in an automobile accident which left her in a "persistent vegetative state." When Cruzan's parents attempted to terminate the life-support system, state hospital officials refused to do so without court approval. Judgment- Missouri Significance- the Court held that while individuals enjoyed the right to refuse medical treatment under the Due Process Clause, incompetent persons were not able to exercise such rights. The Court found the State of Missouri's actions designed to preserve human life to be constitutional. Simon & Schuster v. New York Crime Victims Board, 1991 To keep criminals from profiting from crimes by selling their stories, New York State's 1977 "Son of Sam" law ordered that proceeds from such deals be turned over to the New York State Crime Victims Board. In 1987 the Board ordered Henry Hill, a former gangster who sold his story to Simon & Schuster, to turn over his payments from a book deal. Judgment- Simon & Schuster Significance- The Court concluded that "New York has singled out speech on a particular subject for a financial burden that it places on no other speech and no other income." Bush v. Gore, 2000 Reason- The Florida Supreme Court ordered that that every county in Florida must immediately begin manually recounting all "under-votes" because there were enough contested ballots to place the the election outcome in doubt. Bush and Cheney sought an emergency petition for a stay of the Florida Supreme Court's decision. Judgment- Bush, Significance- the Equal Protection clause guarantees individuals that their ballots cannot be devalued by "later arbitrary and disparate treatment," the opinion held that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional. The 2000 Presidential race was decided in George W. Bush’s favor. United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Coop Reason- Under a 1996 CA law, the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative was organized to distribute marijuana to qualified patients for medical purposes. The government charged them with violating the Controlled Substances Act's prohibitions on distributing, manufacturing, and possessing with the intent to distribute or manufacture a controlled substance. Judgment- The United States Significance- the Court held that there is no medical necessity exception to the Controlled Substances Act's prohibitions on manufacturing and distributing marijuana. The distribution, manufacturing and possession with the intent to distribute is still illegal under Federal law.