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- 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
 Significance- 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- 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
•
Significance- Legalized abortion and is at the
center of the current controversy between
“pro-life” and “pro-choice” 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 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
 Significance- The release of the tapes forced Nixon to resign
from office,
Lau v. Nichols, 1974
Corning v. Brennan, 1974
Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 1975
Califano v. Goldfarb, 1977
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- affirmative action was
unfair if it lead to reverse discrimination..
•
Significance- The Court ruled that while race
was a legitimate factor in school admissions, the
use of rigid quotas was not permissible.
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
DeShaney v. Winnebago, 1989
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.