Supreme Court Cases
Chisholm v. Georgia (1793)
• Background: Executive Council of Georgia authorized the purchase
of needed supplies from a South Carolina businessman. After
receiving the supplies, Georgia did not deliver payments as
promised. After the merchant's death, the executor of his estate,
Alexander Chisholm, took the case to court trying to collect from the
state. Georgia stated that it was a sovereign state not subject
authority of federal courts.
• Court Decision: Supreme Court ordered Georgia to pay the money
Chisholm sought
• Chief Justice: John Jay
• Legal Impact: considered one the first United States Supreme Court
Case of significance and impact; resulted in the eleventh
amendment which removed federal jurisdiction in cases where
citizens of one state or of foreign countries attempt to sue another
state
Marbury v. Madison
•
•
•
•
Background - When President Jefferson was elected 2 days before he
entered office President Adams appointed Federalist William Marbury as
justice of the peace in the District of Columbia in fact his official letter of
appoint met signed by President Adams didn’t arrive until Jefferson was in
office was in office dubbing it the “midnight appointments”. By then Madison
was the new secretary of state Jefferson ordered him to with hold the letter
of commission for Marbury
Issue - Marbury sued for a court order for Madison to give him the
commission.
Court Decision - Chief justice Marshall said Marbury deserved commission
but the court had no jurisdiction in the case. The court ruled that section 13
of the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789, giving the court authority over the
matter, was unconstitutional because the constitution gave court original
jurisdiction only in cases involving ambassadors and states.
Impact of decision - It was the first supreme court decision to rule a law
unconstitutional
• Chief Justice- John Marshall
• Issue- U.S. Supreme Court decision determined
whether or not the sale of the Yazoo land , by
Roger Fletcher, to John Peck was fraud.
• Decision- Court decided that laws annulling the
grant made by previous legislative acts were
constitutionally forbidden
- congress paid $4.2 million to the original spectators in
1814
• Dates:February 22, 1819March 6, 1819
• Background: In 1816
congress chartered the
second bank of he US. In
1818 Maryland passed
legislation to impose taxes on
the bank.
•
•
Issue: James W. McCulloch who
was the cashier of the Baltimore
branch of the bank, refused to pay
the tax.
Chief Justice: John Marshall
•Court Decision: Unanimously decided
that Maryland could not tax
instruments of the national
government employed in the execution
of constitutional powers.
•Legal Impact of the decision: case
established that the constitution
grants congress powers in order to
create a functional national
government and that state action
can’t impede constitutional exercise
of power by federal government
Gibbons Vs. Ogden
• The Case was in 1824
• This case decided that interstate
commerce was to be controlled and
regulated by Congress.
• The “Commerce Clause” was added to the
US Constitution, which gave Congress this
power.
• The Chief justice of this court case was
John Marshall.
Synopsis
• Gibbons was operating a steamboat service off
the New York coast (regulating trade for
Congress), when Ogden (someone trading in
New York ports) filed a complaint. New York
State said the Ogden was right, and that
Gibbons had to stop, but Gibbons had US
Congressional permission, so it went to the
Supreme Court to decide whether state or
federal government had the power to regulate
interstate commerce.
Background:
Worchester v. Georgia
-whites living in Cherokee Indian Territory had to have a state license
-seven missionaries refused to obey the law
-argued that the laws were unconstitutional
Issues:
-states power to pass laws concerning Indian nations
Court Decision(s):
-Worchester is convicted
-court ruled states had no power to pass the laws
-convictions were reversed
Chief Justice:
John Marshall
Legal Impact of the Decision:
-disagreements between the 3 branches of government
-reaffirmation of tribal sovereignty becomes basis for court decisions for the next 160
Dred Scott V. Sandford (1857)
Background:
• Dred Scott, a slave had lived in the free state of Illinois and the free territory of
Wisconsin, move back to Missouri to claim his freedom.
Issues:
• But the State supreme court ruled against Scotts, arguing that slave state did
not have to honor freedom granted to slaves by free states. This case reach to
the supreme court.
Court Decisions:
Chief Justice: Roger B. Taney
• Taney reasons that when Scott return to the slave state, he had reverted
to slave status upon his return to Missouri.
• Taney ruled that Scott don’t have the authority to stand in court because
he lack the citizenship.
Legal Impact of the Decision:
• The supreme court ruled that the African decedents are not protected
by the constitution meaning they have no rights to sue or the rights of
citizenship. They are also excluded from the bill of rights.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
• Scott based his legal argument claiming his presence and residence
in free territories required his emancipation. Scott's lawyers argued
the same for Scott's wife, and further claimed that Eliza Scott's birth
on a steamboat between a free state and a free territory had made
her free upon birth.
• Chief Justice- Robert Taney
• Ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States
and held as slaves, or their descendants—whether or not they were
slaves—were not protected by the Constitution and could never be
citizens of the United States. It also held that the United States
Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories.
Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896)
•
•
•
•
Background:In 1890, the State of Louisiana passed an act that required separate
accommodations for African Americans and Whites on railroads. Concerned, several
African Americans and Whites in New Orleans formed an association, the Citizens'
Committee to Test the Separate Car Act, dedicated to the repeal of that law. Later,
they enlisted Homer Plessy, who was one-eighth black, to take part in an act of
planned civil disobedience. The plan was for Plessy to be thrown off the railway car
and arrested not for violating the Separate Car Act, which could and did lead to a
challenge with the high court. The intellectual roots of Plessy v. Ferguson were in part
tied to the scientific racism of the era.
Issue(s):On June 7, 1892, Homer Plessy boarded a car of the East Louisiana
Railroad that was designated for use by white patrons only. Although Plessy was born
a free person and was one-eighth black under a Louisiana law enacted in 1890, he
was classified as Black, and thus required to sit in the "colored" car. When, in an act
of planned disobedience, Plessy refused to leave the white car and move to the
colored car, he was arrested and jailed
.Court Decision(s): Court rejected Plessy's arguments based on the Fourteenth
Amendment. Chief Justice predicted the Court’s decision before it happened.
Legal Impact of the Decision:Plessy provided an impetus for further segregation
laws. Legislative achievements won during the Reconstruction Era were erased
through means of the "separate but equal" doctrine.
Schenck v. the United States
•
•
•
Background:The Espionage Act was passed to promote American unity in World
War I. Charles Schenck was the Secretary of the Socialist party. During the time of
World War I he printed and gave out 15,000 copies of hand outs to men that could be
drafted to the war. The handouts encouraged draftees to fight against the draft and
essentially assert their perceived right of being able to resist the draft. They insisted
that the draft was a product of the corrupt ways of capitalism. His hand outs told men
not to “submit to intimidation" and to assert their “rights.” Although, he suggested
only peaceful ways to protest, like petitioning.
Issue(s):This court case tested the First Amendment by what ‘freedom of speech’
really defined. It questioned if what Schenck was advertising and advocating
presented a danger that Congress was able to prevent before it erupted. It also
challenged the Espionage Act because Schenck was attempting to convince people
against the war
Chief Justice – Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Holmes decided that Schenck didn’t have
protection by the First Amendment in his case. The court unanimously decided that a
person’s right to speech and what they could say was different in wartime then it was
in peacetime. It was concluded that, in essence, actions and consequences depend
on their circumstances. The Espionage Act was upheld as a reasonable Schenck
was charged with conspiracy against it.
Schenck vs. United States (1919)
 Under Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
 Sec. of Socialist Party Charles Schenck organized
opposition to the WWI draft by sending leaflets
urging men eligible for draft to resist intimidation
and “assert your rights”
 Supreme Court convicted Schenck because he
didn’t have right to the 1st Amendment to speak out
against military draft
 Est. the “clear and present danger” rule-during
wartime, more restrictions are put on free speech
than during peacetime & upheld the Espionage Act
of 1917
Abrams v. United States
Supreme Court Case: Abrams v. United States October 21, 22, 1919
Background: Convicts were in violation of the Espionage Act which
prohibited any attempt to interfere with military operations, support America's
enemies during wartime, promote insubordination in the military, or interfere
with military recruitment.
Issue(s): Jacob Abrams, a Russian immigrant and an anarchist, was arrested in
New York City along with several of his comrades for throwing leaflets they
printed out the windows of a building in New York City. One leaflet, signed
"revolutionists", denounced sending troops to Russia and the other written in
Yiddish denounced the war and US efforts to stop the Russian Revolution. The
case would decide whether the anarchist violated the Espionage Act or were
they protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
Court Decision(s): Upheld the conviction and the Espionage Act as
constitutional and the anarchist were convicted to 20 years in jail.
Chief Justice: Oliver Wendell Holmes
Legal Impact of the Decision: People became a lot less open if they were in
disfavor of the war efforts of the united states not a lot of antiwar rallies during
this time
Brown v. Board of Education of
Topeka, Kansas (1954)
• Background: Started with Linda Brown
wanting to go to the school near her
instead of the one a mile away.
• Issue: Schools are segregated
• Decision: Declared segregation in schools
unconstitutional
• Chief Justice: Earl Warren
• Legal Impact: Overruled Plessy V.
Ferguson’s “separate but equal”
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas
(1954)
Sarah Wheeler
APUSH Mr. Wilson 2nd
Background:
Topeka, Kansas, a black third-grader, Linda Brown, had to walk one mile through a railroad
switchyard to get to her black elementary school, even though a white elementary school was
only seven blocks away. Linda's father tried to enroll her in the white elementary school, but the
principal of the school refused. Mr. Brown went to the head of Topeka's branch of the NAACP
and asked for help.
Their case was combined with other cases that challenged school segregation in South Carolina,
Virginia, and Delaware
Issue(s):
Segregation in schools and that even if separate facilities were equal in quality, the fact that they
were segregating people by race gave blacks feelings of inferiority to whites
The constitutionality of state-sponsored segregation in public schools
separate school systems for blacks and whites were unequal, and thus violated the "equal
protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment
Court Decision(s):
Chief Justice – Earl Warren
Chief Justice Warren and the Supreme Court unanimously voted that “…in the field of public
education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place.”
Legal Impact of the Decision:
The “Southern Manifesto”
Struck down racial segregation in public education and declared “separate but equal”
unconstitutional.
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
Chief Justice-Earl Warren
Background
Issues
On March 29, 1960 The New York Times published a
full- page advertisement, “Heed Their Rising Voices,”
requesting funds to defend Martin Luther King Jr.
against a perjury charge. In the advertisement some
actions against Civil Rights protestors were falsely
described. Some of these descriptions involved the
Montgomery, AL police force, which in turn reflected
Commissioner L.B. Sullivan, or so he claimed.
L.B. Sullivan was displeased with the way he
may have been perceived due to the New
York Times advertisement and demanded a
retraction be printed in order to attain
recovery in this libel action. The New York
Times refused to print a retraction so
Sullivan sued.
*Libel-a legal term meaning defamation by
written or printed words.
Legal Impact of the Decision
Court Decision
Sullivan received $500,000 in an Alabama
court. However, the Supreme Court said
that the Alabama ruling violated the First
Amendment.
Therefore the Court ruled that Public
Officials may not recover damages from
such a slanderous action unless “actual
malice” is proven. Meaning they must
prove that “that the statement was made
with … knowledge that it was false or
with reckless disregard of whether it was
false or not.”
New York Times vs. Sullivan
• Summary- This case concerns a full-page ad in
the New York Times which alleged that the arrest
of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. for perjury in
Alabama was part of a campaign to destroy
King's efforts for civil rights. L. B. Sullivan, the
Montgomery city commissioner, claimed
defamation.
• Result- Sullivan won a $500,000 judgment.
• Judge- Justice Brennan
Engle V. Vitale (1962)
•
•
•
•
Background: The State Board of Regents in New York Public schools were
concerned about a decline in the morality of the students, so they started a program
of “moral and spiritual training” in the schools. The families of public school students
complained the prayer to "Almighty God" contradicted their religious beliefs. They
were supported by groups opposed to the school prayer like rabbinical organizEthical
Cultureations, , and Judaic organizations. The prayer in question was: Almighty God,
we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our
parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.
Issue(s): Whether it was unconstitutional for state officials to make an official school
prayer and require for public schools to recite it. Starring school with a prayer violates
the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution
which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
Court Decision(s): The Court ruled that government-directed prayer in public
schools was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause.
Chief Justice - _____Earl Warren_______
Legal Impact of the Decision: It got the ball rolling on the issue of separation
between church and state in the latter half of the 20th century, because it was
the first in a series of cases in the 1960’s to rule that a variety of religious
activities violated the Establishment Clause.
Mapp vs Ohio (1961)
• : Dollree Mapp The Cleveland Police went over to her house and
demanded entrance. They didn’t have a warrant, so Mapp refused to
let them in. After a while, the officers forced their way inside the
house. Mapp demanded to see a warrant, but the police only flashed
around a piece of paper, who claimed it was a warrant. Police found
a trunk in the basement which contained obscene and vulgar books.
• At the local court, Mapp was convicted for being in possession of the
objects. Mapp’s lawyer demanded to see the warrant the police had
used, but the police were not able to provide it. Mapp then appealed
to the Court of Ohio, but her conviction was still upheld. So she
decided to appeal to the Court of the United States.
• The US Supreme Court finally overturned the previous convictions
based on the fact that it violated the 4th amendment, which guards
an individual against “unreasonable searches and seizures”.
• Evidence gained by an illegal search became unusable in state
courts as well as federal courts.
Miranda v Arizona (1963)
• Ernesto Miranda was arrested for armed robbery, rape and
assault.
• Faced charges of about 40+ years in jail, case was taken to
the Supreme Court; raised concerns of the 5th Amendment
(respect of all legal rights owed to an individual)
• Established that Police may not use statements by the
defendants in police custody unless they are assured of their
rights known as the Miranda Rights, and that a defendant
must have an attorney present during any police interrogation
• Miranda Rights : “You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court
of law. You have the right to be speak to an attorney, and to
have an attorney present during any questioning. If you
cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at
government expense”
Escobedo v. Illinois ( 1964 )
Background:
Danny Escobedo was arrested for murder and denied the right to see or speak
to his lawyer. While under interrogation, he confessed to murdering the victim
and was convicted.
Issue(s):
Escobedo was denied the right to see or speak to a lawyer before being
interrogated and was not read his constitutional rights when arrested.
Court Decision(s):
Chief Justice – Earl Warren
The Supreme Court decided that because Escobedo was not allowed to speak
to his attorney and he had not been warned of his constitutional rights, his case
went against the 6th Amendment and his confession was therefore not allowed
and his conviction was overturned.
Legal Impact of the Decision:
The Supreme Court ruled that any person accused of a crime must be allowed
to consult a lawyer before being interrogated by the police.
• Case under Earl
Warren as Chief
Justice
• 1964, the Supreme
court decided that any
suspect of a crime,
under the Sixth
Amendment, had the
right to counsel during
interrogation
Reynolds v. Sims
• 1964
• Appointment of Alabama Legislature called into question
because the number of legislators did not adjust to the
amount of people in a county
• Chief Justice – Earl Warren
• The major issue was that counties with many people had
few representatives proportionately to those with few
people
• Decision – The amount of representatives from a county
would be based on the population of the county
• This idea was extended into congressional districts
Gideon VS. Wainwright (1968)
• In 1961, Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in a Florida
state court with breaking into and entering a poolroom
with intent to commit a misdemeanor, a combination of
offenses that constituted a felony under Florida law.
• He could not afford a lawyer, and he requested to have
one appointed by the court but he was denied and found
guilty of the charges.
• First trial without a lawyer he was charged guilty. Second
trial with a layer he was charged not guilty.
• The government now hires attorneys to prosecute
defendants, and individuals charged with crimes who are
financially unable to hire attorneys to defend themselves
for a person charged with a felony
Loving v. Virginia
Background:
Mildred Jeter, a Negro woman and Richard Loving, a White man left their
hometown of Virginia to get married in the District of Columbia.
Issue(s):
Interracial marriage in Virginia was illegal at the time, so they were charged
when they returned to their hometown.
The Lovings believed that it violated their 14th amendment rights.
Court Decision(s):
Chief Justice – Earl Warren
The court decided in favor of the Lovings that a state could not deny
someone the right to marry simply because of their skin color, and that it
violated the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th
amendment.
Legal Impact of the Decision:
The legal impact of this decision some hope will be used towards equality in
same-sex marriage.
Tinker v. Des Moines
• John Tinker, Mary Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt
decided to wear black armbands to school with the
peace symbol on them in protest of the Vietnam War.
The school board responded by suspending anybody
with those armbands.
• Conflict with the First Amendment. Was the First
Amendment applicable to public schools?
• 7-2 Vote: Yes, the First Amendment was applicable to
public schools. If speech was regulated in the classroom,
there must be a constitutionally valid reason why.
• Tinker v. Des Moines is still a precedent upheld in the
Supreme Court today in reference to student freespeech rights. School officials must justify censoring
speech
Roe v. Wade ( 1973
)
• A landmark United States Supreme Court
case establishing that most laws against
abortion violate a constitutional right to
privacy, overturning all state laws
outlawing or restricting abortion.
• The Court issued its opinion on January
22, 1973, with a 7-2 majority voting to
strike down the law.
Roe v. Wade (1973)
• In 1969 Jane Roe (Norma L. McCovery )was
pregnant and wanted an abortion
– In the state of Texas abortions were only legal in
cases of rape, incest, or saving the mother’s life.
• Jane Roe filed a suit in the U.S. District Court of
Texas saying the abortion law violated the
constitutional right to privacy.
– Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade
represented Texas
• Supreme Court ruled that the 9th amendment’s
reservation of rights to the people was broad
enough to encompass a woman’s right to end her
pregnancy (ruled in Roe's favor)
• Importance: Ended state laws forbidding abortion,
a big feat for the women’s rights movement.
Regents of the University of
California v. Bakke
• Allan Bakke applied to the University of
California, Davis School of Medicine and was
rejected two years in a row
• Despite his higher academic scores, Bakke was
not admitted because he was white and therefore
not part of a minority
• 5-4 split: UC Davis Medical School's “special
admissions” program was unconstitutional, deny
applicants based on race
• 5-4 split: UC Davis has to admit Bakke
• Established that there could be no race “quota,”
however race can be used as a “plus factor”