Marbury v Madison 1803
• was the first instance in which a law passed by
Congress was declared unconstitutional. The
decision greatly expanded the power of the
Court by establishing its right to overturn acts of
Congress, a power not explicitly granted by the
Constitution. Initially the case involved Secretary
of State James Madison, who refused to seat
four judicial appointees although they had been
confirmed by the Senate
McCulloch v Md. 1819
• upheld the right of Congress to create a
Bank of the United States, ruling that it
was a power implied but not enumerated
by the Constitution. The case is significant
because it advanced the doctrine of
implied powers, or a loose construction of
the Constitution. The Court, Chief Justice
John Marshall wrote, would sanction laws
reflecting “the letter and spirit” of the
Constitution.
Gibbon v Ogden 1824
• defined broadly Congress's right to
regulate commerce. The Court held that
the New York law was unconstitutional,
since the power to regulate interstate
commerce, which extended to the
regulation of navigation, belonged
exclusively to Congress. In the 20th
century, Chief Justice John Marshall's
broad definition of commerce was used to
uphold civil rights
Barron v Baltimore 1833
• Bill of Rights applied only to the federal
government not to the states.
• Eminent domain case
Dred Scott v Sanford 1857
The case involved Dred Scott, a slave, who was
taken from a slave state to a free territory. Scott
filed a lawsuit claiming that because he had
lived on free soil he was entitled to his freedom.
Chief Justice Roger B. Taney disagreed, ruling
that blacks were not citizens and therefore could
not sue in federal court. Taney further inflamed
antislavery forces by declaring that Congress
had no right to ban slavery from U.S. territories
Plessy v Ferguson 1896
• was the infamous case that asserted that
“equal but separate accommodations” for
blacks on railroad cars did not violate the
“equal protection under the laws” clause of
the 14th Amendment. By defending the
constitutionality of racial segregation, the
Court paved the way for the repressive
Jim Crow laws of the South. The lone
dissenter on the Court, Justice John
Marshall Harlan, protested,
Schenck v US 1919
• Certain words can be
considered clear and
present danger during war
time and are not protected
by the 1st Amendment
Gitlow v NY 1925
• Socialist called for socialism
in NY. Claimed NY violated
his rights. Supremes said no
it did not BUT SC did say
the 1st Amendment does
apply (incorporation) does
apply to states.
Everson v Bd of ed 1946
• This case said that a school district could
provide school buses for religious schools.
Such assistance would not violate the
establishment clause. Everson v. Board
of Education
Everson v Board of Ed 1947
• This case said that a school district could
provide school buses for religious schools.
Such assistance would not violate the
establishment clause. Everson v. Board
of Education
Brown v Bd of Education 1954
• invalidated racial segregation in schools and led
to the unraveling of de jure segregation in all
areas of public life. In the unanimous decision
spearheaded by Chief Justice Earl Warren, the
Court invalidated the Plessy ruling, declaring “in
the field of public education, the doctrine of
‘separate but equal’ has no place” and
contending that “separate educational facilities
are inherently unequal.” Future Supreme Court
justice Thurgood Marshall was one of the
NAACP lawyers who successfully argued the
case. Rhenquist was a clerk that disagreed.
Mapp v Ohio 1961
• Evidence was seized illegally and could
not be used court.
• Incorporated the exclusionary rule into the
14th Amendment and extended it to the
states.
Baker v Carr 1962
• Federal Courts could hear
redistricting cases for state
legislatures.
• It led to Wesberry v Sanders
1962 – Ga. Cong. Districts
were disproportional in size
violating “one man one vote”
Shaw v Reno 1993
• White voters said boundaries of new
congressional districts were minority
majority.
• Court agreed saying the odd shape was
created to create a black district.
• Race may be one factor but not be the
only factor in drawing district boundaries.
Baker v Carr 1961
• Established that federal courts do have
jurisdiction in redistricting questions and
that reapportionment should reflect
population equality or it would be in
violation of the Equal Protection Clause
Gideon v Wainright 1963
• Florida did violate person’s
right to a lawyer by not
providing one.
Heart of Atlanta Hotel
v US 1964
• The motel's argument is that the government
overstepped its bounds by using the Commerce
Clause to exert influence over the hospitality
industry in forcing them to treat black guests as
they would white guests. The motel lost its case
in district court and appealed to the Supreme
Court. The Court found that the Congress did
have the power exerted in the Act, and that the
motel had no case against the Act.
Griswold v Connecticut 1965
• Held that various guarantees within the Bill
of Rights create penumbras that establish
a right to privacy in marital relations
Miranda v Arizona 1966
• The Warren Court reversed the conviction
bc the suspect was not informed of his
rights.
• The court would not uphold any conviction
on appeal if the accused had not been
informed of their constitutional rights
before being questioned.
Tinker v Des Moines 1968
• The Court ruled in favor of students' rights
to exercise their freedom of speech
symbolically by wearing black armbands to
protest the war in Vietnam.
Lemon v Kurtzman
1971
Pa law regarding funding for nonpublic
school violated 3 part test of
entanglements, promotion,purpose
NYT v US 1971
• The Court ruled in this case that the
government could not exercise prior
restraint to prevent a newspaper from
publishing negative information about the
country's involvement in Vietnam.
• Pentagon Papers Case Daniel Ellsburg
gov employee leaked it. Late Nixon’s
people broke into Ellsburg psychiatrist
office
Roe v Wade 1973
• legalized abortion and is at the center of
the current controversy between “pro-life”
and “pro-choice” advocates. The Court
ruled that a woman has the right to an
abortionin the first trimester of pregnancy,
contending that it is part of her “right to
privacy.” States may intervene in the 2nd
and rd trimesters.
US v Nixon 1974
• Case which ruled that executive privilege
was not unqualified
Buckley v Valeo 1976
• Upheld contribution limits in elections, but
said candidates could spend their own
funds without limit; also held that since
financial support of a candidate is
protected under freedom of speech that
individuals and outside groups could
spend unlimited amounts as long as they
were independent of the candidate's
campaign
Regents of U. of Calif v Bakke
1978
• Supremes upheld notion of affirmative
action but said race could be only one
factor in determining admission.
• Significant bc race could no longer be a
predominant factor.
• Since 1978 rulings have been mixed.
Upholding some and striking down some.
• See Grutter 2003 U of Michigan
Immigration and Naturalization
Service v Chadha 1982
• Ruled that the legislative veto was
unconstitutional Immigration and
Naturalization Service v. Chadha
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
• The Court reaffirmed a woman's right to
have an abortion but upheld restrictions
such as a 24-hour waiting period prior to
an abortion and requiring minors to get a
parent's consent before an abortion
Shaw v Reno 1993
•Black majority district
violates equal protection
clause of 14th
amendment.
US v Lopez 1994
• Ruled that the Fed. Gun Control Act
prohibiting the possession of a gun within
1000 ft. of a school was unconst.; limited
the application of the Commerce Clause
Lawrence v Texas 2003
States may not prohibit private homosexual
activity between consenting adults.
• Overturned opposite view of Bowers 1986