Landmark Supreme Court Cases

1
Landmark Supreme Court Cases

• EQUAL JUSTICE
• UNDER LAW

2
Abington School District v. Schempp

• Also known as School District of Abington
  Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp, 1963
• Do opening exercises including scripture reading
  and recitation of the Lords prayer violate the
  Establishment and Free Exercise clauses? (1st
  amendment)
• Yes, such exercises are a violation of the
  establishment clause (8-1)
• if the purpose and effect of a law is the
  advancement or inhibition of religion, it exceeds
  the scope of legislative power.

3
Baker v. Carr (1962)

• Do imbalances among congressional districts deny
  residents equal protection of the laws? (14th
  amendment)
• Do federal courts have jurisdiction over cases
  involving malapportionment?
• The court ruled yes on both questions (6-2)
• This case helps lead to the Wesberry case that
  established the one person, one vote principle
  in redistricting cases
• One of 3 key redistricting cases. Can you name
  the other two?

4
Bethel School District 403 v. Fraser (1986)

• Do schools have the right to restrict students
  speech content?
• Is sexually suggestive speech protected by the
  1st amendment?
• Yes to the first issue, no to the second (7-2)
• Students can be punished for speech in school
  that would be protected in other settings.
• the Court has upheld time, place and manner
  restrictions in other cases as long as they are
  content neutral

5
Brown v. Board of Ed. of Topeka, Kansas (1954)

• Overturned the Plessy decision
• What does this case say about stare decisis?
• Is this case an example of judicial activism?
• separate but equal is inherently unequal
  because the very fact that separate schools exist
  marks one race as inferior
• The courts opinion was unanimous (9-0)

6
Buckley v. Valeo (1976)

• Are campaign contributions and expenditures
  protected by the 1st amendment as political
  speech?
• Is the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974
  constitutional?
• The Court ruled that it is not a violation of
  free speech rights to limit the amount
  individuals or groups may contribute to
  campaigns, but that it is a violation to limit
  the amount of money candidates or groups may
  spend. (no majority vote)

7
Bush v. Gore (2000)

• Does the manual recount of votes cast in Florida
  violate the equal protection clause?
• Yes, because the standards for judging a voters
  intent in the recount werent uniform
• Historical implication of this case 1st time
  the Court intervened in a presidential election
  critics claim this interference ensured Bushs
  election
• (7-2 vote on the equal protection question, 5-4
  on stopping the recounts)

8
Clinton v. City of New York (1998)

• Is the Line Item Veto Act of 1997 constitutional?
• Do you remember what a line item veto is?
• Why would Congress want to give the executive
  this power?
• No, the Act is not constitutional because it
  violates the doctrine of separation of powers.
• (6-3)

9
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)

• Are slaves citizens?
• Is the Missouri Compromise constitutional?
• The Court answered no to both questions, which
  contributed to the political tensions leading up
  to the Civil War. (7-2)
• What amendment would later be passed that would
  ensure the citizenship of former slaves and free
  people of color?
• Is this case an example of judicial activism or
  judicial restraint?

10
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health
(1990)

• Does someone have a constitutionally protected
  right to die under the 9th amendment?
• This is the original right to die case.
• The court ruled in a 5-4 decision to reject Nancy
  Cruzans parents request that they be allowed to
  take their daughter off life support (a feeding
  tube) due to a lack of clear and convincing
  evidence that Nancys parents would be honoring
  their daughters wishes.
• This case drew attention to the need for living
  wills, especially for terminally ill patients.
• How does this case compare with the Terri Schiavo
  case from 2005?

11
Edwards v. Aguillard ( 1987)

• Are state laws requiring the teaching of
  creation science a violation of the First
  Amendments Establishment clause?
• Yes, because such laws violate the Lemon test
• is there a clearly secular purpose?
• Does the statute neither advance nor inhibit
  religion?
• Do such laws create excessive entanglement of
  government with religion? (7-2)
• What recent cases have come before the court on
  this issue?

12
Engel v. Vitale (1962)

• Does the use of a nonsectarian (nondenominational)
  prayer violate the Establishment clause?
• Yes (6-1) because it creates government
  compelled prayer, even if students choose not to
  participate.
• When the power, prestige, and financial support
  of government is placed behind a particular
  religious belief, the indirect coercive pressure
  upon religious minorities to conform to the
  prevailing, officially-approved religion is
  plain.

13
Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)

• Escobedo was accused of murdering his
  brother-in-law. During questioning, he was not
  allowed to consult with his attorney, who was at
  the police station at the time. Escobedo made
  some incriminating statements during questioning,
  but had not been notified of his right to remain
  silent.
• Were Escobedos 6th amendment rights to counsel
  violated?
• Yes (5-4) (general questioning versus an
  accusatory investigative process)
• Upholds the ruling in Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

14
Furman v. Georgia (1972)

• Is the death penalty cruel and unusual
  punishment and therefore a violation of the 8th
  amendment?
• Is the imposition of the death penalty by juries
  done in a fair manner?
• Yes No, which makes it a cruel and unusual
  punishment because juries arent given specific
  guidelines about imposing the death penalty
  (5-4)
• This case was overturned by . . .

15
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

• What happens when state laws regarding commerce
  conflict? Can a state grant an exclusive right to
  navigate its waters?
• Who has the final authority to regulate
  interstate commerce?
• Upheld the constitutionality of the Commerce
  Clause in Article I section 8 (6-0) Why?
• Sometimes called the steamboat case

16
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

• Gideon had been convicted of a misdemeanor. He
  couldnt afford a lawyer and Florida state law
  didnt provide for counsel for non-capital
  crimes.
• Was Gideons 6th amendment right to counsel
  violated?
• Under what circumstances must an accused person
  be provided with legal counsel?
• The due process clause of the 14th amendment
  makes it necessary for the states to recognize
  that in our adversary system of criminal justice,
  any person hauled into court, who is too poor to
  hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial
  unless counsel is provided for him. (9-0)
• This case extends the right to counsel under the
  6th amendment to both capital and non-capital
  cases.

17
Gitlow v. New York (1925)

• Does the freedom of speech guaranteed in the 1st
  amendment apply to the states? (Can states make
  laws that violate it?) This case marks the
  beginning of the incorporation process of the 1st
  amendment.
• Does the 1st amendment protect speech that would
  encourage the overthrow of the U.S. government?
  Just how far does free speech protection go?
• The Court ruled that the 1st amendment protection
  does apply to the states, but that in this case,
  the state had a legitimate interest in protecting
  public safety that trumped an individuals right
  to free speech, so Gitlows conviction was
  upheld. (7-2)

• Has the court ruled consistently on this issue?
  Under what circumstances is the Court less
  tolerant of free speech?
• For a current example, consider Justice Talking
• http//www.justicetalking.org/viewprogram.asp?prog
  ID141

18
Gregg v. Georgia (1976)

• This case was a test of the revised laws many
  states had passed after the Furman decision in an
  attempt to overcome the problems the Court had
  raised with regard to the arbitrary application
  of capital punishment.
• This case upheld that Georgias two phase trial
  process (phase one determines guilt or acquittal,
  second phase determines sentencing) overcame the
  problems the Court had found in the Furman
  decision.
• Overturned the Furman decision and found that the
  death penalty was not necessarily cruel and
  unusual (7-2)

19
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

• Is it legal for states to pass laws that would
  punish any person who uses any drug, medical
  article or instrument for the purpose of
  preventing conception? The law also allowed for
  punishment of anyone who assisted another in
  committing an offense of this law, such as a
  doctor who wrote a prescription for
  contraceptives.
• This case established that certain decisions
  (such as family planning) exist within a zone of
  privacy protected by provisions of the 1st, 3rd,
  4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th amendments. (7-2)
• Griswold is considered the cornerstone of the
  later Roe v. Wade case.

20
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)

• To what extent are school newspapers forums for
  public expression?
• Are student publications free from censorship by
  school authorities?
• The public schools do not possess all of the
  attributes of streets, parks, and other
  traditional public forums meaning that school
  officials retain ultimate control. . .over a
  school-sponsored newspaper. (5-3)
• Can you explain the differences in the Courts
  rulings in this case versus its rulings in the
  Tinker and Bethel cases?

21
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States
(1964)

• Do federal civil rights laws violate a private
  property owners rights to due process under the
  14th amendment?
• Does Congress have the power to enact civil
  rights legislation under the Commerce Clause?
• No and Yes. ((9-0)
• The action of the Congress in the adoption of
  the act Title II of the Civil Rights Act of
  1964 as applied here to a motel which concededly
  serves interstate travelers is within the power
  granted it by the Commerce Clause of the
  Constitution as interpreted by this court for 140
  years.

22
INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) v.
Chadha (1983)

• Is a one-house congressional veto constitutional?
  
• Does Chadha get to stay in the country?
• No and Yes
• In this case, the Court declared the legislative
  veto unconstitutional because Article I requires
  that every order, resolution, or vote to which
  the concurrence of the Senate and House of
  Representatives may be necessary. . . shall be
  presented to the President of the United States.
• Do you remember what a legislative veto is? See
  p. 394-395 in Wilson.

23
Korematsu v. United States (1944)

• Following the invasion of Pearl Harbor, President
  Truman issued an executive order to clear all
  persons of Japanese descent from California and
  relocate them to internment camps. (Executive
  Order 34)
• Was this executive order a proper exercise of the
  war power even though it uses racial
  classifications, which are subject to the highest
  judicial scrutiny?
• In a 6-3 vote, the Court said yes. Although this
  case raises all sorts of civil rights issues, the
  court only agreed to take up the question of the
  Presidents use of war powers rather than
  imposing martial law.
• Under President Regan, Congress passed
  legislation to provide financial compensation to
  the living survivors of the exclusion and
  relocation orders.

24
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

• Established the 3-part Lemon test used to
  determine if a statute, law or action violates
  the Establishment clause of the 1st amendment.
• The three parts are
• is there a clearly secular purpose for the
  government action?
• Does the statute neither advance nor inhibit
  religion?
• Do such laws create excessive entanglement of
  government with religion?
• If the answer to any of the above is yes, then
  the Establishment clause has been violated.

• In this case, the states of Pennsylvania and
  Rhode Island were giving state money to parochial
  schools to use to pay for books, teacher
  salaries, etc. for academic subjects only. The
  Court found that while these actions did have
  purely secular functions (using taxpayer money to
  help educate the states children), it created
  excessive entanglements between religion and
  government.
• For example, would the science teachers be forced
  to teach evolution if it violated the schools
  doctrinal positions?
• (7-1 vote)

25
Marbury v. Madison (1803)

• Is the Judiciary Act of 1789 authorizing the
  Supreme Court to issue writs of mandamus
  constitutional? Does Marbury get his job?
• Why is this arguably the most important Supreme
  Court case ever?
• Whats the historical significance of the Courts
  decision in this case? The answer to this has
  two parts. . . (5-0)
• Consider Justice Marshalls words It is
  emphatically the province and duty of the
  judicial department to say what the law is and
  Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties
  agreeably to the constitution , if that
  constitution forms no rule for his government?
  If it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected
  by him?

26
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

• Does Congress have the power to create a bank?
• Can the state of Maryland tax such a bank?
• Yes to the first, no to the second.
• This case upholds the idea that Congress has
  implied powers based on the necessary and
  proper clause found in Article I section 8

27
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

• Are confessions obtained during a suspects
  interrogation as part of an investigation
  admissible as evidence if the suspect has not
  been notified of his/her right to remain silent
  (5th amendment) or right to have counsel present
  (6th amendment)?
• One of the Warren courts most controversial
  decisions. Why would this case be considered
  judicial activism?

• In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled to overturn
  Mirandas conviction. the prosecution may not
  use statements, whether exculpatory or
  inclupatory, stemming from custodial
  interrogation of the defendant unless it
  demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards
  effective to secure the privilege against
  self-incrimination. By custodial interrogation,
  we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement
  officers after a person has been taken into
  custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of
  action in any significant way.

28
Near v. Minnesota (1931)

• A newspaper called The Saturday Press published
  by Mr. Near and others published a series of
  articles that accused public officials with
  gross neglect of duty or misconduct in office.
  The newspaper was shut down under a state statute
  aimed at malicious, scandalous and defamatory
  periodicals which found the paper to be a
  public nuisance
• Is this an infringement of the liberty of the
  press under the 14th amendment?
• The court ruled yes in a 5-4 vote. This case
  upheld the idea that prior restraint amounts to
  censorship of the very kind the Framers intended
  the 1st amendment to prevent. So, even though
  some newspapers might exploit a scandal, state
  laws cant be used to prevent publication.

29
New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)

• Should school officials have to meet the same
  standards of reasonableness for conducting
  searches as law enforcement officials do when
  dealing with the public?
• The issue here is the conflict between the
  schools need to provide safety and order and a
  students reasonable expectation of privacy under
  the 14th amendment
• The Court ruled 5-3 that schools have to meet a
  lesser standard that searches be reasonable
  rather than the probable cause standard.

30
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)

• This is a famous libel case originating in
  Montgomery, Alabama
• To what extent does the 1st amendment protect
  people who criticize public officials?
• Several minor details in the ad which ran in the
  Times were incorrectdid this constitute libel?
  Can public officials sue for libel if people
  criticize their actions as public officials?
• In a unanimous vote, the court ruled that
  erroneous statement is inevitable in free
  debate and that the Alabama law that allowed the
  law suit would create condition in which critics
  of official conduct may be deterred from voicing
  their criticisms, even though it is believed to
  be true and even though it is in fact true,
  because of doubt whether it can be proved in
  court or fear of the expense of having to do so.
  
• Remember the Alien and Sedition Acts? The Court
  did in writing the opinion in this case!

31
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

• Did the Louisiana law allowing for separate but
  equal rail cars for whites and blacks violate
  the 13th and 14th amendments?
• The court ruled no to both questions in a 7-1
  vote. Justice Harlan dissented, writing that
  our Constitution is color-blind, and neither
  knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.
• This case upheld the separate but equal
  standard that proliferated in the South and other
  places across the country under Jim Crow laws
  after the Civil War.
• Which case overturned this decision?

32
Powell v. Alabama (1932)

• One of the famous Scottsboro boys cases.
• Were the defendants denied the right to counsel
  and then tried in a hostile environment too
  quickly to develop an adequate defense?
• This case is one in a series through which the
  court slowly developed the fundamentals of
  fairness to which an accused person (especially
  the poor and minorities) is entitled under the
  Constitution. (7-2)
• What other cases help develop this doctrine?

33
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
(1978)

• Are quota systems in college admissions unlawful?
• Is it acceptable to consider race as a factor in
  admissions criteria?
• This case was the first major legal challenge to
  affirmative action policies.
• The Court ruled (5-4) that the UC-Davis policy
  amounted to a quota and was a violation of the
  14th amendments equal protection clause, but
  upheld that race may be considered as part of
  admissions criteria.
• This was an extremely controversial ruling and
  produced 7 separate opinions.

34
Reynolds v. Sims (1964)

• Another redistricting case originating in
  Birmingham, Alabama when residents of Jefferson
  County challenged the apportionment of the
  Alabama state legislature.
• Was the equal protection clause of the 14th
  amendment violated?
• The Court ruled (8-1) that apportionment must be
  based primarily on population.

35
Roe v. Wade (1973)

• This case is NOT just about abortion Does the
  14th amendment use of the word person include
  the unborn? Does the right of privacy found in
  the Constitution include a womans right to an
  abortion?
• In a 7-2 decision, the court found that the term
  person applies only after birth We need not
  decide the difficult question of when life
  begins. When those trained in the respective
  disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology
  are unable to arrive at any consensus, the
  judiciary, at this point in the development of
  mans knowledge, is not in a position to
  speculate as to the answer.
• This case is often cited as the exemplar of
  judicial activism and is considered a litmus
  test for judicial nominees.

36
Santa Fe School District v. Doe (2002)

• Do student-led, student-initiated, invocations
  broadcast at public school football games violate
  the establishment clause of the 1st amendment as
  applied to the states by the 14th amendment?
• In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that they are
  a violation of the establishment clause.
• You be the judge Does the schools policy hold
  up under the Lemon test?
• The court held that the policy subjected those
  who attended the games to what some may find a
  personally offensive religious ritual

37
Schenck v. United States (1919)

• What does this case say about civil rights and
  liberties during times of war?
• In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that
  Schencks actions, by encouraging men to evade
  the draft constituted a clear and present
  danger to national security. Established the
  clear and present danger test.
• How does this case compare to other cases when
  safety, national security, the public good, etc.
  have been pitted against the rights of the
  individual?

38
Texas v. Johnson (1989)

• Was Johnsons action of burning the flag during a
  protest at the 1984 Republican National
  Convention a form of constitutionally protected
  freedom of speech/expression?
• What is symbolic speech? What kinds of speech or
  actions did the Framers intend to protect when
  they wrote the 1st amendment?
• Was Johnson prosecuted not for his point of view,
  but because of the method he chose to express
  his dissatisfaction? (Justice Stevenss dissent)

39
Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969)

• Does the 1st amendment protect the rights of
  public school students to wear black armbands to
  school in protest of the Vietnam War?
• In a 7-2 vote, the court held that the students
  action was protected because the school board
  didnt demonstrate that the action was disruptive
• It can hardly be argued that either students or
  teachers shed their constitutional rights to
  freedom of speech or expression at the
  schoolhouse gate. (Justice Fortas, writing for
  the majority)
• Has the Court been consistent in its rulings on
  these types of cases?

40
United States v. Nixon (1974)

• Can a federal court force a president to turn
  over materials (papers, tapes, etc) that a
  president has claimed are covered by executive
  privilege?
• In an 8-0 decision, the court ruled that to read
  the Article II powers of the president as
  providing an absolute privilege. . .would upset
  the constitutional balance of a workable
  government and gravely impair the role of the
  courts under Article III.
• What were the historical implications of this
  ruling?

41
Wesberry v. Sanders (1964)

• Another redistricting case upholds the one
  person, one vote principle
• While it may not be possible to draw
  congressional districts with mathematical
  precision, that is no excuse for ignoring our
  Constitutions plain objective of making equal
  representation for equal numbers of people with
  the fundamental goal of the House of
  Representatives. That is the high standard of
  justice and common sense which the founders set
  for us.

42
Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)

• Another case that originated out of Alabamaa
  Mobile man sued on behalf of his children, making
  the case that a state statute that permitted one
  minute of silence or voluntary prayer amounted
  to regular religious services.
• The court ruled 6-3 that in this case we are
  faced with a state measure which forces an
  individual, as part of his daily life. . .to be
  an instrument for fostering public adherence to
  an ideological point of view he finds
  unacceptable. The 1st amendment protects the
  right to select any religious faith or none at
  all. (Justice Stevens)
• Would the moment of silence pass the Lemon test
  if the wording was changed?

43
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)

• The first major challenge to Roe, this case
  upheld that state legislatures can place some
  limits on abortions.
• Specifically,
• can states refuse to spend taxpayers money on
  abortions? (yes)
• Can states decide when life begins (language in
  the Missouri law said life began at conception)?
  (yes)
• Can states recognize the rights of the unborn?
  (yes)
• How are these limitations not inconsistent with
  the Roe decision?

44
West Virginia State Board of Ed. v. Barnette
(1943)

• Can states require students to recite the Pledge
  of Allegiance or salute the flag? What if
  students religious beliefs consider this to be
  worshipping a graven image?
• Do such laws pass the Lemon test?
• Do such laws prohibit the students free exercise
  of religion?
• The West Virginia state statute was found
  unconstitutional in a 6-3 vote

45
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

• This case involves Amish families who wished to
  end their childrens schooling at the eighth
  grade. Although they felt further education
  teaches values they viewed as at odds with the
  traditional Amish lifestyle, the parents
  recognized the need for elementary education as
  necessary in order to read the Bible, to be good
  farmers and citizens and to be able to deal with
  non-Amish people when necessary in the course of
  daily affairs.
• Do compulsory education laws infringe on the free
  exercise clause?
• In a 6-1 decision, the court found that such laws
  do violate the free exercise clause.
• Some critics of this ruling contend that by
  exempting the Amish, the state is actually
  violating the establishment clause. (theres
  always more than one viewpoint!)