Landmark
Supreme Court
Cases
U. S. v. Nixon
Facts of the Case
Watergate Hotel; burglars break into Democratic Party headquarters.
White House staff are charged with the crime. Prosecutor found out
President Nixon taped conversations with his staff. Nixon is ordered to turn
over the tapes. President refuses. Prosecutor sues the President in order
to have him turn over the tapes.
Questions Presented:
Does the executive branch have the privilege to withhold information from
criminal investigation (judicial branch).
Conclusion:
Executive
privileges are subordinate to the due process rights of criminal
investigations.
Marbury v. Madison, 1803
Facts of the Case
-John Adams tried to appoint Marbury and several other guys to positions before he left
office of Presidency.
-The last minute attempts were never finalized
-The angry appointees sued for their jobs in the Supreme Court
Question Presented
-Is Marbury entitled to his appointment?
Conclusion
-Yes
- Established “Judicial Review” the ability for courts to interpret the Constitution
McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819
Facts of the Case
-Congress created the Second Bank of the United States
-In 1818 the state of Maryland passed extra taxes on the bank
-James McCulloch refused to pay the taxes
Question Presented
-Did Congress have the authority to establish the bank?
-Did Maryland law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers?
Conclusion
-CONGRESS had the power to establish banks through implied powers
-The federal government cannot be taxed by state governments
Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
Facts of the case
-A New York state law gave Aaron Ogden a license to operate steamboats on
waters within state jurisdiction
-Thomas Gibbons had a similar license to do the same thing but his was a
Federal coasting license granted by Congress
Questions Presented
-Who had the power to regulate interstate commerce?
Conclusion
- The Court found that Congress had more power issuing license for “interstate
commerce” because under the Constitution the Congress had all power over
regulating commerce.
Supreme Court
and
Facts of the Case
-Louisiana passed a law that required separate railway cars for blacks and whites
-Homer Plessy took a seat in the a “white only” car of a train. He refused to move to the car
for blacks and was arrested
Question Presented
- Did this arrest violate his 14th amendment (equal protection)
Conclusion
-Conclusion “You can keep things separated as long as they are equal.” “Separate but
equal”
Plessy v. Ferguson,
1896
Brown v. Board of Education,1954
Facts of the Case
-Schools were separate by race and Linda Brown had to walk five miles to
school through a dangerous train switching ground when a white school was
one block from her home. He father sued to get his daughter allowed in the
white schools.
Question
-Is segregation a violation of the 14th “equal protection” amendment?
Conclusion
- “YES” you cannot possibly by separated and equal because “Separate is NOT
equal”
*** Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg B.O.E
Swann V. Charlotte Mecklenburg Board
of Education-1969
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/12/10/weekinreview/10liptak.600.jpg
http://www.reclaimcivilrights.org/images/timeline/07_1974.jpg
Swann V. Charlotte Mecklenburg Board
of Education-1969
•
Facts of the Case: School officials at the large public school district
of Charlotte Mecklenburg, North Carolina were acting slowly to federal
court ordered integration in Brown vs. Board of Edu.
•
Questions Presented Busing students to schools outside of their
district in order to achieve integration.
•
Decision: Court held that busing was an appropriate remedy for the
problem of racial imbalance.
Lasting Impact: Prohibited Racial Segregation in schools. Busing was
used as a way to “properly” integrate schools
•
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S.,
1964
Facts of the case
-The Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbade
racial discrimination in public places.
-The Heart of Atlanta Motel in Atlanta,
Georgia refused to accept Black
Americans
Question presented
-Did Congress deprive motels of the
right to choose their own customers?
Conclusion
-The Court concluded that public
places had no “right to select guests
as they saw fit, free from government
regulations….THEY HAD TO OPEN
THE DOORS TO ALL.
Korematsu v. United States,
1944
Facts of the case
-During World War II, President issued an Executive Order to detain all Japanese
Americans into containment camps during to the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
Korematsu refused to leave his girlfriend and go into the camps.
Question presented
-Did the President and Congress go beyond their war power by restricting the
rights of American Japanese descent
Conclusion
- The courts sided with the government and held that the need to protect against
espionage outweighed Korematsu’s rights.
Regents of the University of
California V. Bakke-1978
http://www.landmarkcases.org/bakke/images/clown_cartoon.gif
Once Dred Scott and his family were
finally freed in 1858, they lived in St.
Louis Missouri, where Scott was a
local celebrity until his death only 18
months later. He died of tuberculosis
in 1858.
Scott v Sanford 1857
Roger Taney remained Chief Justice
until after the Civil was began, although
by that time he was hated by both the
North and South, including president
Lincoln.
When & Where?
(the arrows depict Dred Scott’s voyage from slave to free back to
slave territory)
St. Louis Misouri, location of early court proceedings
Washington D.C., location of Supreme Court hearing
Free territories
Scott lived in
Decision of Supreme Court
The Scott’s daughters were added to the
case
March 1857: Scott lost the decision as
seven out of nine Justices on the Supreme
Court declared no slave or descendant of a
slave could be a U.S. citizen, or ever had
been a U.S. citizen
As a slave and therefore a non-citizen
Scott had no rights and could not sue in a
Federal Court
State of NC v Mann 1830
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Decision before the court:
Is killing a slave a crime?
Facts of the case:
Mann, the slave owner, was found guilty by a jury of twelve white men
drawn from his community, for killing his slave. The court imposed a five
dollar fine.
Decision of the state court:
The North Carolina Supreme Court overruled the conviction of the local jury
on the grounds that slaves were the absolute property of their owners.
Actions of the owners could not be punished by law unless the state
legislature authorized such punishment. For which they did not.
Effects of the decision:
The state reaffirmed that slaves were property.
The History of Leandro
•
•
•
•
•
In May 1994, parents, school boards and students from five low-wealth
counties (Cumberland, Halifax, Hoke, Robeson and Vance) against the
State Board of Education and the State of North Carolina. Some of the
poorest counties in the State said that the State did not provide enough
money for them to provide their children with a quality education. The
lawsuit is commonly known as Leandro, after a named plaintiff in the case.
Six urban school districts also asked to be parties to the Leandro lawsuit,
stating that the state funding formula did not provide them with sufficient
money to educate their at-risk students and students for whom English is
not their first language. [ Asheville City, Buncombe County, CharlotteMecklenburg, Durham County, Wake County, and Winston-Salem-Forsyth]
Eventually the matter was heard by the North Carolina Supreme Court. In
1997, the Supreme Court breathed new life in the case by finding that our
state constitution guarantees “every child of this state an opportunity to
receive a sound basic education in our public schools.”
• Definition of a Sound Basic Education
• “(1) Sufficient ability to read, write and speak the English language
and sufficient knowledge of fundamental mathematics and physical
science to enable the student to function in a complex and rapidly
changing society;
• (2) sufficient fundamental knowledge of geography, history and
basic economic and political systems to enable the student to make
informed choices with regard to issues that affect the student
personally or affect the student’s community, state, and nation;
• (3) sufficient academic and vocational skills to enable the student to
successfully engage in post-secondary education or vocational
training;
• (4) sufficient academic and vocational skills to enable the student to
compete on an equal basis with others in further formal education or
gainful employment in contemporary society.”
•
• Leandro v. State , 346 N.C. 336, 347, 488 S.E.2d 249, 255 (1997)
•
Supreme Court
and the
Engel v. Vitale, 1962
Facts of the Case
-The Board of Regents for the State of New York authorized a short,
voluntary prayer for recitation at the start of each school day.
-“ Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and beg
Thy blessings upon us, our teachers, and our country.”
Question Presented
-Does the reading of a nondenominational prayer at the start of each
school day violate the “establishment of religion” clause of the First
Amendment?
Conclusion
- YES, Neither the prayer’s nondenominational character nor its
voluntary character saves it from unconstitutionality. By providing the
prayer, New York officially approved religion.
Tinker V. Des Moines, 1969
Facts of the Case
-John Tinker (15), Mary Beth Tinker (13), and Christopher Echardt (16) decided to
protest the vietnam war by wearing black arm bands to their school during the
Christmas holiday seasion
-The principals of the school districts said that all student wearing these arm bands
were to take them off or face suspensions. They feared it would provoke disturbances
-The students wore their armbands anyway and when they did not take them off they
were suspended until after New Year’s Day
Questions
-Did this violate the students’ “First amendment right?”
Conclusion
- The wearing of the armbands was part of freedom of speech. Although school
officials have the right to prohibit certain actions, they fail to show how the protest
would cause trouble and disturbance in the school setting
Regents of the University of
California V. Bakke-1978
•
•
•
•
Facts of the Case: -Allan Bakke was a highly qualified graduate who
applied to the University of California Medical School twice and was denied.
The school had set aside specific slots for minorities to increase minority
presence due to affirmative action. He sued the school because he felt he
was discriminated upon due to his race.
Affirmative action” means positive steps taken to increase the
representation of women and minorities in areas of employment, education,
and business from which they have been historically excluded.
Questions Presented
– Affirmative Action
– 14th Amendment-Equal Protection Clause
Conclusion: The court held that a university could consider an applicant’s
race in making admissions decisions, but the use of strict racial quotas in
affirmative action programs was not permissive. Universities may use race
as an admission factor but they can not save certain positions specifically
for a racial group
Bethel School District No. 403 v.
Fraser, 1986
Facts of the case
-At a school assembly Matthew Fraser made a speech nominating a fellow student for
elective office
-In his speech Matthew used a graphic sexual metaphor to promote the candidacy of his
friend.
-Fraser was suspended from school for two days
Question Presented
-Does the First Amendment prevent a school district from discipline a high school
student for giving a lewd speech at a high school assembly?
Conclusion
- No, the court found that it was appropriate for the school to prohibit the use of vulgar
and offensive language.
Fraser’s Speech
"I know a man who is firm - he's firm in his pants, he's firm
in his shirt, his character is firm - but most [of] all, his
belief in you the students of Bethel, is firm. Jeff Kuhlman
is a man who takes his point and pounds it in. If
necessary, he'll take an issue and nail it to the wall. He
doesn't attack things in spurts - he drives hard, pushing
and pushing until finally - he succeeds. Jeff is a man who
will go to the very end - even the climax, for each and
every one of you. So please vote for Jeff Kuhlman, as
he'll never come between us and the best our school can
be [long pause after the word "come"
Hazelwood School District v.
Kuhlmeier,1988
Facts of the case
-THE SPECTRUM, the school-sponsored news paper of Hazelwood East High School, was
written and edited by students.
- The Principal, received the proof of the May 13th issue and found that two of the articles
were inappropriate
-He ordered that the pages on which the articles appeared by withheld from publication
-Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other former Hazelwood students brought the case to court
Question Presented
-Did the deletion of the articles violate the student’s 1st Amendment right?
Conclusion
- NO, school newspapers are sponsored by the school and articles not directly reflecting the
view of the school for “learning” purposes can be deleted from the paper.
Texas v Johnson,1989
Facts of the case
-Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag as a means of protest against
Reagan administration policies.
-Johnson was tried and convicted under a Texas law outlawing flag desecration.
He was sentenced to one year in jail and assessed a $2,000 fine.
Question of the case
-Is the burning of an American flag a form of speech protected under the 1st
Amendment?
Conclusion
- The court found that the burning of the flag is protected under “expression” in
the 1st amendment.
4th Amendment
Mapp v. Ohio, 1961
Facts of the case
-Dolree Mapp was suspected of hiding a
bombing suspect in here home. Police showed
up without a valid search warrant. Police found
pornographic materials and arrested her for
possession of pornographic materials.
Question Presented
-May evidence obtained through a search in
violation of the 4th amendment be admitted in a
state criminal proceeding?
Conclusion
- Materials obtained from a violation of the 4th
Amendment is inadmissible in a state court
Search
Warrant
New Jersey v. T.L.O, 1984
Facts of the Case
-T.L.O was a 14 year old accused of smoking
in the girl’s bathroom
-A principal at the school questioned her and
searched her purse and found a box of
cigarettes and rolling papers
- He decided to search the pocketbook further
and found a bag of marijuana (and other drug
paraphernalia), plastic bags, money, and a list
of people who still owed her money.
Question presented
-Did the search violate the 4th Amendment?
Conclusion
-NO, the school official is allowed to search a
student if he/she has reasonable suspicion
that a crime has been committed or is in the
act of being committed.
5th Amendment
Miranda V. Arizona, 1966
Facts of the case
-Ernesto Miranda had been arrested at his home in Phoenix, Arizona and accused of
kidnapping and rape.
-He was questioned at the police station by 2 police officers has was not advised of his
right to an attorney nor his right to remain silent.
-After two hours of interrogation, he signed a written confession to the crime.
-He was found guilty and sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison
Question
-Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifying them of their right to
counsel and their protection against self-incrimination violate he 5th Amendment?
Conclusion
-A person in police custody “or otherwise deprived of his freedom…must be warned prior
to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, and that anything he says can be
used against him in the court of law..”
In Re Gault, 1967
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban960l.jpg
In Re Gault, 1967
• Facts of the Case: Gerald F. Gault (15 years old) was arrested
making obscene phone calls while on probation.
– Police arrested him without notifying his parents at work.
– In juvenile court he was found guilty and sent to a reform school
until the age of 21.
• Questions Presented: Due Process Clause listed under the 14th
amendment.
• Conclusion: The Supreme court determined the proceedings of the
Juvenile Court were unconstitutional due to violation of due process
clause of the 14th amendment
6th Amendment
• Right to Council/Lawyer
• Speedy Trial
Gideon V. Wainwright, 1963
Facts of the Case
-Gideon was charged in a Florida state court with a felony for breaking and entering.
-He lacked funds as was unable to hire a lawyer to prepare his defense
-When he requested the court to appoint an attorney for him, the court refused
-Gideon defended himself in the trial; he was convicted by a jury and the court sentenced him
to 5 years in a state prison
Question presented
-Did the state court’s failure the appoint counsel for Gideon violate his right to a fair trial and
due process of law as protected by the 6th 14th (equal protection)
Conclusion
- Gideon had the right to be represented by a court-appointed attorney. The right to an
attorney was essential to a fair trial. Lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries.
8th Amendment
• No Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Furman V. Georgia-1972
http://www.reachandteach.com/content/img/civ/civio0013.gif
Furman V. Georgia-1972
• Facts of the Case: William Henry Furman was robbing a house
and the owner came home. He claimed that has he was running to
leave he tripped and he weapon fired killing the owner. Furman was
tried for murder and found guilty and was sentenced to death.
•
Question
– Cruel and Unusual Punishment,
– Death Penalty
•
Conclusion: The Supreme Court held that the death penalty constituted
cruel and unusual punishment and violated the Constitution and states must
rethink their capital punishments laws .
Gregg V. Georgia-1976
http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/timeline/images/1962/1976-RMC.jpg
Gregg V. Georgia-1976
•
•
•
•
•
Facts of the Case: Gregg picked up 2 hitchhikers and robbed and
murdered them. He was found guilty of armed robbery and sentenced him
to death. Gregg challenged his death sentence for the murder, claiming that
his capital sentence was a "cruel and unusual" punishment
that violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Question Presented:
– Cruel and Unusual Punishment,
– 8th Death Penalty
Conclusion:The Court held that a punishment of death did not violate the
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments under all circumstances.
Lasting Impact: In extreme criminal cases, such as when a defendant has
been convicted of deliberately killing another, the careful and judicious use
of the death penalty may be appropriate if carefully employed.
9th Amendment
• Rights to the citizens
Roe v. Wade, 1973
Facts of the Case
-Roe, a Texas resident sought to terminate her
pregnancy by abortion.
-Texas law prohibits abortions except to save
the life of the woman
Question presented
-Should a women be allowed the rights to her
own body?
Conclusion
- The court held that a women’s right to an
abortion fell within the right to privacy protected
by the 9th amendment and 14th equal protection
under the law.