The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties Chapter 18-2 Nine old men: Supreme Court in the 1960s.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Supreme Court Case Review The Rights of the Accused
Advertisements

Supreme Court Cases You Need to Know
Christina Ascolillo.  Who was involved: Ernesto Miranda and the State of Arizona.  When:  Where: Phoenix, Arizona  Why: Arrested and charged.
The Warren Court Jill St. Laurent Carley Denis. Earl Warren 14 th Chief Justice Very Liberal vs Conservative Appointed by Eisenhower Racial Equality.
The Investigation Phase Criminal Law and Procedure.
Rights of the Accused th – Amendment Presumption of innocence Presumption of innocence Manzanar –one of our big failings Reasonable doubt Reasonable.
Miranda Rights 5th Amendment
The Warren Court Changing America’s Interpretation.
The Warren Court 1953 – – 1969 Chief Justice Earl Warren Chief Justice Earl Warren Liberal decisions Liberal decisions Supported the rights of.
Warren Court. Warm-up Do you have rights when you are being arrested? What rights do you have?
Supreme Court Decisions
Miranda v. Arizona.
BY: KATIE LOSINIECKI Miranda v. Arizona. Facts Ernesto Miranda was arrested in 1966 for the kidnapping and rape of an 18 year old woman After being interrogated.
Miranda v. Arizona 1966 Read Miranda v. Arizona Parties Facts Issue.
Miranda v Arizona Escobedo v Illinois By Austin Lallier.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Mr. Blough Academic Civics.
Gideon vs. Wainwright (1963)
Miranda v. Arizona. Facts of the Case Police arrest Ernesto Miranda after the victim identifies him in lineup Police interrogate Miranda for two hours.
8 Landmark Supreme Court Cases
Landmark Supreme Court Cases. Marbury v Madison, 1803 Midnight Appointments – Court Appointments by John Adams Established the power of Judicial Review.
Issue: Equality Issue: Civil Liberties Issue: Rights of the Accused Issue: The Judicial Branch
Landmark Supreme Court Cases. Marbury v. Madison (1803) A United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial.
Significance of Supreme Court Cases (Judicial Review) Objective: I can explain and describe the significance of Supreme Court cases and judicial review.
Defendant’s Rights and the Right to Privacy AMERICAN GOVERNMENT.
Chapter 7 Judicial Branch. Review ???? 1.What is any behavior that is illegal called? 2.What laws are passed by lawmaking bodies? 3.What is an appeal?
Important Court Cases THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW! Important Cases Marbury v. Madison (1803) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Brown.
Do They Have the Right??? You SHALL Decide……. Case #1 The United States is involved in a controversial war. To show their opposition to the war, two students.
Miranda vs. Arizona Right to Remain Silent.
Supreme Court Cases Criminal Rights 1960’s. Gideon vs. Wainwright 1963 state courts are required under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Important Supreme Court Cases Marbury v. Madison (1803) Marbury v. Madison (1803) Supreme Court may interpret the Constitution and determine whether a.
Ashley Nine March 25, 2010 Period 7.  Poor living immigrant from Mexico living in Arizona.  He was charged with rape and kidnapping.  He was arrested.
Unit 4 Lesson 8: Miranda v. Arizona
Look over all the cases in the powerpoint and select only one of the cases. Open the Supreme Court Cases Reading file on Edmodo and read about the case.
IMPORTANT LANDMARK CASES THAT DEFINED THE SUPREME COURT I : Three Cases that help define the role of Federal Power. A. Marbury v. Madison (1803) established.
Chapter 20: Civil Liberties: Protecting Individual Rights Section 3.
The Warren Court ( ). Wordsplash Create one sentence per term using some clue words from below. DUE PROCESS Lawlegal principles No citizen may.
The Warren Court ( ) Appointed by Eisenhower Liberal period in court’s history Protected Civil Liberties & First Amendment Rights Malapportionment.
Miranda V. Arizona By: Elise Kloppenburg. Facts of the Case Phoenix, Arizona 1963 Ernesto Miranda, 23 years old Arrested in his home Taken to the police.
Unit IV: The Judicial Branch The Third Branch of Government.
Supreme Court Cases of the 60s. Mapp v. Ohio, 1961 What happened? - illegal search of home found “obscene materials”. Mapp was convicted. Brought to court.
Objective: To examine the importance of the Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education.
Supreme Court Cases. Marbury v Madison Issue: Should the Constitution be very strictly interpreted or is there room for interpretation? If there.
The Warren Court and judicial activism “The biggest damn fool mistake I ever made”, Dwight D. Eisenhower on Earl Warren, quoted in 1977 Chief Justice,
Judicial Change The Warren and Burger Court. Earl Warren.
Quote of the Day: “School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students in school as well as out of school are "persons" under.
Aim: How did the Warren Court expand civil rights for everyone?
In the criminal justice system, the Supreme Court has the final say. In the 1960s, the dedicated Justices who heard these cases were members of an elite.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases:
The Warren Court 1953 – 1969 Chief Justice Earl Warren
Landmark Supreme Court Cases:
Cases involving Constitutional Law are heard in Federal Court
Cases involving Constitutional Law are heard in Federal Court
Judicial Branch Article 3.
John F. Kennedy
Judicial Branch Famous Trials.
The Warren Court 1953 – 1969 Chief Justice Earl Warren
Landmark Supreme Court cases
3.12 landmark supreme court cases
Liberalism vs. Conservatism
AP Gov Test - Supreme Court Cases
Landmark Supreme Court Cases
Major Supreme Court Decisions
L.B.J. AND THE GREAT SOCIETY CHAPTER 20:3
Landmark Supreme Court Cases
Looking into the Important Cases in the Past
Lesson 4.2: The Warren Court
The Warren Court AP US History.
Do Now: a) Finish up Rights Movement Packet b) Earl Warren Background
Presentation transcript:

The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties Chapter 18-2 Nine old men: Supreme Court in the 1960s

What are the three branches of our government and what powers do they possess? Legislative –Congress –Make laws Executive –President –Enforce laws Judicial –Interpret laws Below: diagram of our national government

How does the Court make decisions? Based on precedent: –Previous decisions and laws –Constitution Based on current needs of the country: –Laissez faire economics Northern Securities Case Mueller v. Oregon –Segregation Plessy v. Ferguson Brown v. Board of Ed –Abortion Roe v. Wade ? –War of Civil Liberties Korematsu v. United States Racial profiling for terror suspects Above: women work in a ‘sweatshop’; below: sign saying ‘white only’

What was the Warren Court? Supreme Court headed by Earl Warren ( ) Noted for its judicial activism (progressive, if you like it) Courts named after the chief justice who presides over them Earl Warren appointed by Eisenhower to eliminate a rival Brown v. Board of Education (1954) first big ruling The current Court (group of 9) is called the Roberts Court, named after Chief Justice John Roberts above: Earl Warren; below: Supreme Court c. 2007

We’ve learned in the past that it is easy to learn what the constitution says. It is difficult to know what it means. The supreme court does this for us. Another image of the 9 justices in the late Sixties

Describe the Baker v. Carr case: Main issue was reapportionment –Urban congressional districts had less reps (less voting power) than rural districts Gerrymandering –Shaping the boundaries of a district in order to keep political power within a certain groups hands Baker case –Court ruled that federal gov. had power to ensure one man, one vote Warren: –Legislators represent people, …not acres… Above: our own district (PA 13 th ); below: a Gerrymandered district

What was at issue in the cases? What was at issue in the Engle v. Vitale & Abington v. Shempp cases? Prayer in school 1st amendment –Prohibits an state-established religion Engle v. Vitale –Banned School prayer –in NY a nondenominational prayer was said after Pledge of Allegiance Abington v. Shempp –Banned Bible reading in public schools Abington HS read passages from Bible after Pledge Current Backlash over Ten Commandments in courthouses Above: protest against school prayer; below: prayer group starts the day at the school flagpole

What are civil liberties? Freedom from excessive or unwarranted government control or intrusion set limits for government so that it cannot abuse its power and interfere with the lives of its citizens Includes rights listed in 1 st Amendment: privacy, free speech…and in other Amendments: fair trial, no boarding soldiers, etc. Above: cartoon implies fmr. VP Cheney has blasted a hole in the Constitution; below: reporters who broke open Watergate scandal

What does the 6 th Amendment say? All citizens have the right to have the assistance of counsel (a lawyer) for his defense What if you cannot afford an attorney? When does the right begin? What if you don’t understand your rights? Top to bottom: Gideon, Escobedo, Miranda

Discuss Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). Landmark case in which Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state courts are required to provide counsel to defendants unable to afford their own attorneys Clarence Earl Gideon had been charged with burglary for breaking into a pool hall in Panama City, Florida Acted as own attorney Used the prison library to research and write (in pencil on prison stationery) to the Supreme Court Warren Court ruled in his favor Above: Gideon close-up; below: text of cartoon is self-explanatory

Describe the Escobedo v. Illinois case. Supreme Court decision that said criminal suspects have a right to counsel during police interrogations & provided counsel at trial. Danny Escobedo's brother-in-law, Manuel, a Chicago convict, was shot and killed on the night of January 19, During police interrogation Escobedo asked to speak to an attorney His attorney was left waiting in lobby He later confessed and was eventually convicted for aiding and abetting murder of Manuel Court said the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a right to counsel begins when defendants become primary suspects Above: Escobedo mugshot; below: cartoon notes danger of co- defendants working out an alibi

Describe the Miranda v. Arizona case (1966). Supreme Court decision that said criminal suspects must be informed of their right to consult with an attorney and of their right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police In 1963, Ernesto Arturo Miranda was arrested for rape Later confessed to robbery and attempted rape under interrogation by police Sentenced to 20 to 30 years imprisonment on each charge Arizona Supreme Court emphasized heavily the fact that Miranda did not specifically request counsel Warren Court decision said a suspect must be made aware of right to counsel and of 5 th Amendment clause that you needn’t testify against self –Miranda himself served 11 years –Made a living autographing Miranda cards –Killed in bar fight in 1976 Miranda Rights: ‘You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.’ Above: Miranda mugshot; below: what’s on Miranda card

Civil Liberty Law and Order

What is your opinion of these Court decisions? Personally? From a legal standpoint? Have they stood the test of time? Is it possible for a decision to be ‘right’ for its time, and not for a later time? Above: Earl Warren, ; below: John Roberts 2005-?