LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES - cabarrus.k12.nc.us
LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES
|NAME AND DATE OF CASE | | | |
| |BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CASE |QUESTIONS/ |OUTCOME OF CASE/SIGNIFICANCE |
| | |PART OF CONSTITUTION | |
| |PRESIDENT JOHN ADAMS APPOINTS PEOPLE TO HIGH POSITIONS |Presidential power ---- checks and |JUDICIAL REVIEW (where the Supreme Court can |
|Marbury v. Madison |THEN LEAVES OFFICE HOURS LATER. |balances – gave Supreme Court power. |declare laws unconstitutional). |
| | | | |
| |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. | | |
|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 | | | |
|Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board |1965 BUSING. SEGREGATION. |14TH AMENDMENT |FEDERAL COURTS CAN TELL STATES TO END |
|of Ed | | |SEGREGATION… |
| |VERY IMPORTANT NC STATE CASE | | |
| | |Article I, section 8 – “the commerce |Gibbons wins – The Supreme Court said the |
| |Gibbons owned a ferry operation with a federal license, and Ogden had a NY license to|clause”. AND Supremacy Clause |NATIONAL GOVERNMENT REGULATES INTERSTATE |
|Gibbons v. Ogden |do the same thing. Ogden tried to shut down the Gibbons ferry, and Gibbons sued to | |COMMERCE/ |
| |the Supreme Court. | |Supremacy |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |WAR POWERS, 14TH |ALLOWS FOR JAPANESE AMERICAN INTERNMENT CAMPS. |
|Korematsu v. US |Japanese internment camps during WWII. | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. US |HOTEL REFUSED TO serve AFRICAN AMERICANS. |14TH and Civil Rights Act of 1964 |SUPREME COURT SAID THEY HAD TO ACCEPT ALL |
|1964. | | |CITIZENS -- all public facilities had to accept |
| | | |all citizens. |
| | | | |
|Furman v. Georgia |GUN GOES OFF WHEN DROPPED, KILLING PERSON. Furman gets death penalty. | |DEATH PENALTY CAN BE CRUEL AND UNUSUAL IN CERTAIN|
| | |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 |EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO A LAWYER – EVEN POOR |
| | |found innocent. |PEOPLE. |
|Gideon v. Wainwright |POOR GUY DIDN’T HAVE LAWYER AND WAS FOUND GUILTY. | | |
|Regents of the University of |Bakke (white guy) applies to college and is denied admission. He sues claiming |14th, Civil Rights act of 1964. |AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS OK, BUT NO QUOTAS |
|California v. Bakke |discrimination because several African Americans with lower test scores are accepted.| | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| |T.L.O. was a 14-year-old girl who was accused of smoking in the restroom at school. A|Did the search violate the 4th and 14th|No. STUDENTS CAN BE SEARCHED WITHOUT PROBABLE |
| |principal questioned her and searched her purse, yielding marijuana and other drug |amendments? |CAUSE ON SCHOOL GROUNDS. |
|New Jersey v. T.L.O. |items plus a list of buyers. | | |
| | |1st amendment |SCHOOLS MAY PROHIBIT VULGAR AND OFFENSIVE |
| |Student gives speech to 11-14 yr olds with sexual innuendo. | |LANGUAGE. |
|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 |
| |newspaper. | |STUDENT 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 |
| |confession. Police admitted that Miranda had not been advised of his right to an | |WHILE 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 |
|Mapp v. Ohio |though they were looking for a fugitive. Is this evidence admissible in court? | |USED! |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| |Dred Scott a slave -- his owner dies in a free state. Dred then sues the Supreme |Missouri Compromise because there was |Slaves were not people, but property. This is a |
| |Court for his freedom. |no 14th Amendment yet. |pro-slavery court decision. Roger B. Taney was |
|Dred Scott v. Sandford | | |Chief Justice. |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| |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 |
| |prints information, and the United States takes them to the Supreme Court. | |since the publication did not result in the |
|NY Times v. US | | |immediate harm to the people. |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| |Watergate audiotapes of Nixon (oops). Nixon states that "Executive Privilege" allows|Article I and II of the Constitution |Court ruled against Nixon. Took power away from |
| |him to withhold tapes from investigators. |dealing with Congress, the President, |the President and gave more authority to |
|US v. Nixon | |and Executive power. |Congress. Solidified Checks and Balances. |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|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) |
| | | | |
|McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819 |National/Federal Bank versus Maryland’s(State) right to tax the bank |Necessary and Proper Clause |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 |National 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 over |Supremacy Clause |
|NC State Case |John Mann of Chowan County. Mann shot and wounded Lydia when she struggled to escape |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.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- citing supreme court cases bluebook
- supreme court cases fourth amendment
- nys supreme court cases search
- new york supreme court cases online search
- supreme court cases coming up
- supreme court cases about freedom of speech
- supreme court cases about guns
- supreme court cases list
- supreme court cases amendment 8
- supreme court cases first amendment
- supreme court cases involving religion
- us supreme court cases now