Judicial Activism
Cases:
Brown v. Board, 1954 (9-0)
Majority: “Separate is inherently equal
Dissenting view: African- Americans have not achieved higher rates of
success in predominantly white schools (desegregation), who is to say they
can’t achieve academic success sitting next to another African-American.
Texas v. Johnson, 1989 (5-4)
Majority: Burning a flag is a form of expression, that is allowed under first
amendment freedom of speech
Dissenting: Flag is a unique symbol that stands for multiple things.
(freedom, national identity) and should be protected
U.S. v. Lopez, 1995 (Gun Free School Zones Act) (6-3)
Majority: Congress broad authority could not be used to justify the use of
commerce as an argument to limit the possession of handguns. Possession of
a handgun did not limit the amount of travel (amount of commerce) within a
school zone. States could still pass laws that regulated the use of/possession
of handguns. Lopez could not be convicted under federal law (state law yes)
Dissenting:
Clinton v. New York, 1998 (6-3)
Majority: Line item veto violates separation of powers provided in the
constitution, allows president the ability to “make laws”, a right not afforded
under Article II.
Dissent: Argues that there is no clear violation of the constitution.
Bush v. Gore, 2000 (5-4)
Majority: Florida has specific rules to certify vote count; By hand counting
votes, you expect state officials to determine the intent of the voter.
Dissent: Count should have been allowed. Goes toward the principle of
“fairness”
Atkins v. Virginia, 2002 (6-3)
Facts of the Case:
Daryl Renard Atkins was convicted of abduction, armed robbery, and capital murder. In
the penalty phase of Atkins' trial, the defense relied on one witness, a forensic
psychologist, who testified that Atkins was mildly mentally retarded. The jury sentenced
Atkins to death, but the Virginia Supreme Court ordered a second sentencing hearing
because the trial court had used a misleading verdict form. During resentencing the same
forensic psychologist testified, but this time the State rebutted Atkins' intelligence. The
jury again sentenced Atkins to death. In affirming, the Virginia Supreme Court relied on
Penry v. Lynaugh, in rejecting Atkins' contention that he could not be sentenced to death
because he is mentally retarded.
Question
Is the execution of mentally retarded persons "cruel and unusual punishment" prohibited
by the Eighth Amendment?
Majority: Violates the 8th Amendment standard for cruel and unusual punishment.
Mentally disabled do not have the capacity to understand the ramifications of their
actions.
Dissent: Who can determine what “cruel and unusual” punishment is, particularly when
death sentences are routinely used and have been used in the 20th Century.
Lawrence v. Texas, 1998 (6-3)
Majority: No compelling state interest to regulate homosexual behavior
among males.
Dissent: Court signing on to the homosexual agenda to push for rights not
granted in the Constitution under the 14th amendment.
The Warren Court: (1954-1969)
Miranda v. Arizona, 1966 (6-3)
Majority: 4th/5th Amendment violated, by use of the coercive nature of the
interrogation, which led to the confession.
Dissent: Will put police in difficult position, and not allow them to be
efficient in their respective duties. Will put burden on police, not on
defendant.
Engel v. Vitale, 1962 (6- 1)
Facts: A New York State law required public schools to open each day with the Pledge
of Allegiance and a nondenominational prayer in which the students recognized their
dependence upon God. The law allowed students to absent themselves from this activity
if they found it objectionable. A parent sued on behalf of his child, arguing that the law
violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as made applicable to the
states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Issue: Whether school-sponsored nondenominational prayer n public schools violates the
Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Majority: Violated establishment clause of the 1st Amendment.
Dissent: The invoking of God’s name appears in our currency, the Pledge of Allegiance
Baker v. Carr, 1962 (6-2)
Majority: “One man, one vote” Unfairly favors smaller districts where
representative meets lower bar than other reps.
Dissent: Judicial Branch does not have power to determine law. Violation of
separation of powers.
The Burger Court: (1969-1986)
Roe v. Wade, 1973 (7-2)
Majority: Violated women’s right to privacy and due process as well as
equal protection. Only in first trimester. States could hold interest in 2nd/3rd
trimesters.
Dissent: Court fashioned a decision in favor of the convenience for the
mother and not the fetus. 36 states have passed laws prior to this limiting
abortions.
UC Regents v. Bakke, 1978 (5-4)
Facts: Allan Bakke, a thirty-five-year-old white man, had twice applied for admission to
the University of California Medical School at Davis. He was rejected both times. The
school reserved sixteen places in each entering class of one hundred for "qualified"
minorities, as part of the university's affirmative action program, in an effort to redress
longstanding, unfair minority exclusions from the medical profession. Bakke's
qualifications (college GPA and test scores) exceeded those of any of the minority
students admitted in the two years Bakke's applications were rejected. Bakke contended,
first in the California courts, then in the Supreme Court, that he was excluded from
admission solely on the basis of race.
Question:
Did the University of California violate the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, and the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, by practicing an affirmative action policy that resulted in the repeated rejection of
Bakke's application for admission to its medical school?
Majority: Race can be a plus factor in admissions, but not the sole factor
Dissent: 16/100 saved for African-Americans, not ranked in same manner as
those white students denied admission. Violation under the 14th Amendment.