LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES



LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES

|NAME AND DATE OF CASE | | | |

| |BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CASE |QUESTIONS- |OUTCOME OF CASE/SIGNIFICANCE |

| | |PART OF CONST. | |

| |PRESIDENT JOHN ADAMS APPOINTS PEOPLE TO HIGH POSITIONS |Presidential power ---- checks |JUDICIAL REVIEW (where the Supreme Court can declare |

|Marbury v. Madison |THEN LEAVES OFFICE HOURS LATER. |and balances – gave Supreme |laws unconstitutional). |

| | |Court power. |Gave USSC POWER |

| |Jefferson refuses to appoint them. | | |

|Plessy v. Ferguson |African Americans could be provided “separate but equal” public facilities. |14TH |ALLOWS SEGREGATION that is sep but = |

|1896 |SEGREGATION IS OK. | |LOL!!! |

|Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka,|Overturned Plessy by saying you can never have “separate but equal”. |14TH | |

|Kansas |Ends segregation in and on public grounds and begins integration in schools. | |ENDS SCHOOL SEGREGATION |

|1954 | | | |

| | | | |

|NC STATE CASE |1965 BUSING. SEGREGATION. |1 |FEDERAL COURTS CAN TELL STATES TO END SEGREGATION… |

|Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board | | |Was no real SEGREGATION |

|of Ed |VERY IMPORTANT NC STATE CASE | | |

| | | | |

| |Dealt with “Bus Segregation” | | |

| | |Article I, section 8 – “the |Gibbons wins – The Supreme Court said the NATIONAL |

| |Gibbons owned a ferry operation with a federal license, and Ogden had a NY license to|commerce clause”. AND Supremacy |GOVERNMENT REGULATES INTERSTATE COMMERCE/Supremacy |

|Gibbons v. Ogden |do the same thing. Ogden tried to shut down the Gibbons ferry, and Gibbons sued to |Clause | |

| |the Supreme Court. | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | |WAR POWERS, 14TH |ALLOWS FOR JAPANESE AMERICAN INTERNMENT CAMPS. |

|Korematsu v. US |Japanese internment camps during WWII. | | |

| | | | |

| | | |SUPREME COURT SAID THEY HAD TO ACCEPT ALL CITIZENS -- |

|Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. US |HOTEL REFUSED TO serve AFRICAN AMERICANS. |14TH and Civil Rights Act of |all public facilities had to accept all citizens. 9-0 |

|1964. | |1964 | |

| | | | |

| |GUN GOES OFF WHEN DROPPED, KILLING PERSON. Furman gets death penalty. | |DEATH PENALTY CAN BE CRUEL AND UNUSUAL IN CERTAIN |

|Furman v. Georgia | |8TH,14th |CASES. |

| | |Death penalty | |

| | | |DEATH PENALTY IN ITSELF IS NOT CRUEL AND UNUSUAL. |

| |Gregg kills two people in a robbery. Is the death penalty cruel and unusual in all | | |

|Gregg v. Georgia |cases? |8TH | |

| | | | |

| | |6TH, Was retried with an | |

| | |attorney and found innocent. | |

|Gideon v. Wainwright |POOR GUY DIDN’T HAVE LAWYER AND WAS FOUND GUILTY. | |EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO A LAWYER – EVEN POOR PEOPLE. |

| | | | |

| |Bakke (white guy) applies to college and is denied admission. He suits claiming |14th, Civil Rights act of 1964. |AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS OK, BUT NO QUOTAS |

|Regents of the University of |discrimination because several African Americans with lower test scores are accepted.| | |

|California v. Bakke | | | |

| | | | |

| |T.L.O. was a 14-year-old girl who was accused of smoking in the girls room at her |Did the search violate the 4th |No. STUDENTS CAN BE SEARCHED WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE ON |

| |high school. A principal then questioned her and searched her purse, yielding |and 14th amendments? |SCHOOL GROUNDS. |

|New Jersey v. T.L.O. |marijuana and other drug items plus a list of buyers. | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | |1st amendment |SCHOOLS MAY PROHIBIT VULGAR AND OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE. |

| |Student gives speech to 11-14 yr olds with sexual innuendo. | | |

|Bethel School District v. Frasier | | | |

|Tinker v. Des Moines |Students wear black arm bands to protest the Vietnam war. |1st amendment |STUDENTS MAY WEAR ARMBANDS TO PROTEST . |

| | | | |

| |Students publish articles about teen pregnancy and divorced parents in the student |1st amendment |PRINCIPALS HAVE THE RIGHT TO EDIT / CENSOR STUDENT |

| |newspaper. | |SPEECH. |

|Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier | | | |

| | | | |

| | |1st amendment. |FLAG BURNING IS LEGAL |

| | | | |

|Texas v. Johnson |Johnson burns a flag in protest . | | |

| | | | |

| |Ernesto Miranda arrested for kidnapping and rape – found guilty after signed |5TH AMENDMENT – DUE PROCESS |Miranda wins. A PERSON MUST BE READ HIS RIGHTS WHILE |

| |confession. Police admitted that Miranda had not been advised of his right to an | |BEING ARRESTED. |

|Miranda v. Arizona |attorney during questioning. | | |

| | | | |

| |Police search a house without a search warrant, and find pornographic materials even |4TH AMENDMENT |No. NEED A SEARCH WARRANT OR EVIDENCE CANNOT BE USED! |

| |though they were looking for a fugitive. Is this evidence admissible in court? | | |

|Mapp v. Ohio | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| |Dred Scott a slave -- his owner dies in a free state. Dred then sues the Supreme |Missouri Compromise because |Slaves were not people, but property. This is a |

| |Court for his freedom. |there was no 14th Amendment yet.|pro-slavery court decision. Roger B. Taney was Chief |

|Dred Scott v. Sandford | | |Justice. |

| | | | |

| | | |7-2 |

| |Pentagon Papers (classified info.) was leaked to the NY Times. New York Times then |1st |NY Times wins 6-3. Proves freedom of the press since |

| |prints information, and the United States takes them to the Supreme Court. | |the publication did not result in the immediate harm to|

|NY Times v. US | | |the people. |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| |Watergate audiotapes of Nixon (oops). Nixon states that "Executive Privilege" allows|Article I and II of the |Court ruled against Nixon. Took power away from the |

| |him to withold tapes from investigators. |Constitution dealing with |President and gave more authority to Congress. |

|US v. Nixon | |Congress, the President, and |Solidified Checks and Balances. |

| | |Executive power. | |

| | | | |

|Roe v. Wade |Roe wanted to be allowed to have an abortion but it was against Texas law. |14th and 9th. |Abortions are legal in the 1st trimester and in the |

| | | |second and third in certain circumstances (ie. if |

| | | |mother's life is at risk) |

| | | |7-2 |

|McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819 |National/Federal Bank versus Maryland’s(State) right to tax the bank |Necessary and Proper/ |Necessary and Proper to establish banks |

|[pic] | | | |

|Gibbons v Ogden |When a federal and state law are in conflict, the federal law is supreme Gibbons had |Supremacy Clause |Supremacy |

| |a federal permit for a steamboat business; Ogden had a state permit for the same | | |

| |waters. Siding with Gibbons, the Court said that, in matters of interstate commerce, | | |

| |the “Supremacy Clause” tilts the balance of power in favor of federal legislation. | | |

|State v Mann |In 1829, Elizabeth Jones, who owned a slave named Lydia, hired her out for a year to |State Constitutional Supremacy |Supremacy Clause |

|NC State Case |John Mann of Chowan County. Mann shot and wounded Lydia when she struggled to escape |over Superior Court/local law | |

| |a whipping. Mann was found guilty of battery by a jury of twelve white men drawn from| | |

| |his community and the court (Superior Court Judge Joseph J. Daniel) imposed a five | | |

| |dollar fine. The North Carolina Supreme Court overruled the conviction on the grounds| | |

| |that slaves were the absolute property of their owners who could not be punished at | | |

| |common law unless the legislature authorized such punishment. | | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download