Presentation on theme: "The SUPREME Court Little Known Fact: The Supreme Court did not have its own building until 1935. That is 146 years after its establishment! “The Republic."— Presentation transcript:
The SUPREME Court Little Known Fact: The Supreme Court did not have its own building until 1935. That is 146 years after its establishment! “The Republic endures and this is the symbol of its faith.” Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes
What is a “Landmark Case?” “A case that changes existing law or creates new laws.” (Alan Zegas, Esq.) “…cases that have had an impact on our rights as citizens.” (Bill of Rights Institute) Establishes PRECEDENT. –“A judicial decision that should be followed by a judge when deciding a later similar case.” (Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law)
Marbury v. Madison (1803) Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Texas v. Johnson (1989) Let’s Take a Closer Look!
Established Supreme Court power of JUDICIAL REVIEW. –“A constitutional doctrine that gives to a court system the power to annul legislative or executive acts which the judges declare to be unconstitutional.” (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law) Gives judicial branch powerful check against legislative and executive branches. Marbury v. Madison: Important?
Who are Marbury and Madison? President John Adams commissions Marbury as justice of peace for D.C. right before leaving office. Secretary of State, John Marshall, does not deliver paperwork. Enter President Jefferson: orders new Secretary of State, James Madison, to ignore undelivered papers. Marbury sues Madison to try and get his appointment.
And the Winner is… Supreme Court decides against Marbury. Chief Justice = John Marshall –The same guy that never gave Marbury his paperwork. Oops! Argument is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. –Relies on writ of mandamus (court order) granted by Judiciary Act of 1789. It is agreed that appointment was unfairly withheld from Marbury, but case needed to be heard by a lower court first.
Marbury v. Madison (1803) –Decided against Marbury Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Texas v. Johnson (1989) Let’s Take a Closer Look!
Miranda v. Arizona: Crime Fifth Amendment rights should be automatic upon arrest. –“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
Miranda v. Arizona: Crime Sixth Amendment rights must be made known at time of arrest. –“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”
What was the Problem? Miranda arrested for kidnapping and rape. Identified by victim in lineup. Written confession after 2 hours of questioning. Found guilty at trial. Miranda was Mexican immigrant, police never specifically informed him of his rights.
Watch TV Lately? The Arizona Supreme Court upholds the conviction. Case goes to THE Supreme Court. Ruling is overturned because Miranda was never told he could remain silent (5th) or obtain legal counsel (6th). Chief Justice = Earl Warren. 1.You have the right to remain silent. 2.Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. 3.You have the right to an attorney. 4.If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.
Marbury v. Madison (1803) –Decided against Marbury Miranda v. Arizona (1966) –Ruled in Miranda’s favor Texas v. Johnson (1989) Let’s Take a Closer Look!
Texas v. Johnson: Speak Your Mind Protects First Amendment right to free speech. –“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. ” SYMBOLIC SPEECH and limits. –Burning the American Flag, a national symbol.
Johnson protests Reagan Administration. Sets flag on fire in front of Dallas City Hall. –People find offensive. –TX law prohibits vandalizing respected objects. Convicted. Goes to district Court of Appeals. LOST Goes to TX Court of Appeals. WON State of TX is not happy. GOP Convention, 1984
Taking it to the Top State of TX asks the Supreme Court to hear the case. –They want to keep their law. Do not want flag desecration to be legal. Justice William Brennan writes majority. –“Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea [because it is] offensive.” Chief Justice William Rehnquist dissents. –The flag “is a visible symbol embodying our Nation. It does not represent the views of any particular political party, and it does not represent any particular political philosophy. The flag is not simply another ‘idea’ or ‘point of view’ competing for recognition in the marketplace of ideas.”
Marbury v. Madison (1803) –Decided against Marbury Miranda v. Arizona (1966) –Ruled in Miranda’s favor Texas v. Johnson (1989) –Johnson was within his Constitutional rights Let’s Take a Closer Look!