1. SUPREME COURT CASES Marbury v. Madison (1803)
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Muller v. Oregon (1906)
Schenck v. United States (1919)
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Engel v. Vitale (1962)
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)
Reynolds v. Sims (1964)
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
NY Times v. United States (1971)
Roe v. Wade (1973)
United States v. Nixon (1974)
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)

2. SUPREME COURT CASES Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Issue: Separation of Power
Court Case: Marbury sued Madison because he did not get $ to be a justice of the peace. Marbury asked the Supreme Court to issue an order to force Madison to give him his $
Court Ruling: Against Marbury –. Ruled a portion of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional. 1st act of Congress to be declared unconstitutional.
Precedent: established judicial review – power of the court to decide whether actions of Congress are constitutional.

3. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
SUPREME COURT CASES
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Issue: Federalism (State v. Federal Government)
Court Case: McCulloch was a branch manager for the Bank of the US in MD. Refused to pay tax to the state and was arrested. He appealed conviction on the grounds that a state could not tax the federal government.
Court Ruling: In favor of McCulloch.
Precedent: States cannot tax the federal government.

4. SUPREME COURT CASES Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
Issue: Federalism & Interstate Commerce
Court Case: Ogden was given an exclusive charter for a ferry boat off coast of NY and NJ by the NY state govt. Gibbons given a charter by the US govt to operate a ferry boat in the same waters.
Court Ruling: In favor of Gibbons. Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. Federal government over state.
Precedent: Congress/Federal Government regulates interstate commerce

5. SUPREME COURT CASES Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)
Issue: 5th Amendment, Slavery, Missouri Compromise of 1820
Court Case: Dred Scott sued owner Sanford bc he had been taken into free territory. Scott thought bc of the Missouri Compromise Line (which made slavery illegal in certain areas of the country) he had become free.
Court Ruling: Court ruled in favor of Sanford. 1) Slaves were considered property, thus did not have the right to sue in court. 2) Would deprive owner of 5th Amendment due process rights if he were stripped of property.
Precedent: Missouri Compromise was ruled unconstitutional, slaves could not sue for freedom.

6. SUPREME COURT CASES Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Issue: 14th Amendment (Equal Protection)
Court Case: Herman Plessy, 1/8 black, challenged a LA law that mandated separate railroad cars for blacks and whites. Plessy sat on a car designated to whites and was arrested.
Court Decision: In favor of Louisiana law. Was not ruled a violation of the 14th Amendment, equal protection clause.
Precedent: Separate but equal constitutional. Led to an increase of segregation particularly in southern states.

7. SUPREME COURT CASES Muller v. Oregon (1906)
Issue: 14th Amendment (Equal Protection)
Court Case: Muller was arrested for violating an Oregon law that reduced women to a 10 hour work day. Muller was contracting women to work in excess of 10 hours a day. Muller felt that the law violated the 14th Amendment, the freedom of contract.
Court Ruling: Due to medical information proving the need to protect women, and the harmful effects labor can have on child-bearing, the Court ruled in favor of the Oregon law.
Precedent: States may pass laws to protect certain groups if they can prove benefit to society.

8. Schenck v. United States (1919)
SUPREME COURT CASES
Schenck v. United States (1919)
Issue: 1st Amendment – Times of War
Court Case: Schenck passed out flyer during WWI telling ppl to dodge the draft. Said draft was violation of the 13th Amendment (involuntary servitude). Schenck was arrested under terms of the Espionage Act of Schenck appealed conviction on grounds that his 1st Amendment right had been violated.
Court Ruling: In favor of the United States. Urging citizens to break the law, and posed a threat to security of the nation if successful (clear and present danger).
Precedent: 1st Amendment rights, as well as others can be limited during times of war.

9. Korematsu v. United States (1944)
SUPREME COURT CASES
Korematsu v. United States (1944)
Issue: 5th & 14th Amendment – Times of War
Court Case: During WWII, the US military placed Japanese Americans in internment camps. Korematsu sued the US govt saying that it was a violation of 5th Amendment due process, and the 14th Amendment.
Court Ruling: In favor of the United States government.
Precedent: During times of war, certain group’s rights can be limited. (Clear & Present Danger Rule)

10. Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
SUPREME COURT CASES
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Issue: 14th Amendment – Equal Protection (Separate but Equal)
Court Case: Brown sued the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas bc his daughter had to walk seven blocks to catch a bus to a segregated school when there was a school within six blocks of her house. This was part of a class action suit against the Board of Education.
Court Ruling: The court ruled separate educational facilities were inherently unequal. The ruling in this case led to the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement, and began the end of segregation. Overturned the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson.
Precedent: Separate but Equal is unconstitutional.

11. SUPREME COURT CASES Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Issue: 4th Amendment (Search & Seizure)
Court Case: Police in Cleveland, Ohio believed that Mapp had ties to a gambling ring and may be harboring a fugitive. Didn’t find the fugitive, but found pornographic materials. She was arrested/convicted. Mapp appealed saying a violation of the 4th Amendment.
Court Ruling: The court ruled in favor of Mapp.
Precedent: Illegal evidence cannot be used in court.

12. SUPREME COURT CASES Engel v. Vitale (1962)
Issue: 1st Amendment – Freedom of Religion/Separation of Church and State
Court Case: Students in NY State were reciting a prayer to begin the school day. Even though students weren’t required to recite the prayer, parents felt this was a violation of the 1st Amendment.
Court Ruling: Ruled this was violation of the establishment clause bc it was a prayer & it was being recited in public school.
Precedent: School prayer is unconstitutional.

13. SUPREME COURT CASES Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Issue: 6th Amendment, 14th Amendment
Court Case: Gideon arrested for burglary of FL pool hall. He appeared in court & asked for an attorney. Court said no bc under FL law, only ppl accused of capital crime get a court appointed attorney.
Court Decision: Ruled in favor of Gideon stating that FL violated the 6th Amendment & 14th Amendment & equal protection clause.
Precedent: Indigent defendants (cannot afford an attorney) must be provided counsel in all felony cases.

14. SUPREME COURT CASES Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)
Issue: 5th & 6th Amendment
Court Case: Escobedo and another man, Benedict DiGerlando were interrogated by police in connection with a murder. DiGerlando told police that Escobedo committed the murder. During the interrogation, Escobedo asked to have an attorney, and his attorney asked to speak with Escobedo, the police denied both claims. Eventually Escobedo was able to confront DiGerlando, and told police that it was DiGerlando who committed the murder, by doing so he admitted to being an accomplice and was convicted. He appealed the conviction because he was denied the right to speak with his attorney.
Court Ruling: In favor of Escobedo.
Precedent: Illegal confessions cannot be used in court.

15. SUPREME COURT CASES Reynolds v. Sims (1964)
Issue: 14th Amendment, Federalism, Representative Democracy
Court Case: Sims challenged the redistricting lines drawn by the Alabama Legislature. The lines ignored population & were based on info from 1900; larger urban areas were underrepresented.
Court Ruling: In favor of Sims - AL had violated Constitutional Principle of a representative democracy. Court said that legislative districts must be roughly equal in population.
Precedent: One person = One Vote. State Legislative Districts must be based on population.

16. SUPREME COURT CASES Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Issue: 5th & 6th Amendment
Court Case: Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping & rape. He confessed, but wasn’t read his Constitutional rights before interrogation. Miranda appealed the conviction on the grounds that police violated his rights by not informing him.
Court Ruling: In favor of Miranda; police violated his rights. Police are required to read the “Miranda Rights” as part of due process
Precedent: Police must inform suspects of their 5th & 6th Amendment rights prior to questioning.

17. SUPREME COURT CASES Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
Issue: 1st Amendment – Freedom of Speech/Expression
Court Case: 3 students wore armbands w/ a peace sign to school as a form of protest against the Vietnam War. They were told to remove the armbands, they refused, & were suspended until they returned without them. The parents filed a lawsuit against the school for this action stating it violated the 1st Amendment.
Court Ruling: Ruled in favor of Tinker (students). Court stated schools could est dress codes, but had to show a reasonable disruption to the learning environment to ban items. In this case, the school could not show this.
Precedent: Schools must show a reasonable disruption to learning environment. Upheld 1st Amendment rights of students.

18. NY Times v. United States (1971)
SUPREME COURT CASES
NY Times v. United States (1971)
Issue: 1st Amendment (Freedom of the Press)
Court Case: During Vietnam, the Pentagon put together a paper discussing US decision-making in Vietnam. This classified document was leaked to the NY Times & the Washington Post. The NY Times began publishing the info, but the govt tried to stop them from printing. The NY Times sued saying that it violated the 1st Amendment.
Court Ruling: Ruled in favor of NY Times. Court stated it was the right of the paper to print this material bc they got the information legally.
Precedent: Prior restraint is unconstitutional. Government must be able to prove a “clear and present danger”.

19. SUPREME COURT CASES Roe v. Wade (1973) Issue: 9th & 14th Amendment
Court Case: Texas law didn’t allow women to have abortion unless told by a doctor / bc woman’s life was in jeopardy. “Jane Roe” sued & questioned the constitutionality of the law.
Court Ruling: Ruled in favor of Roe.
Precedent: States cannot ban abortion during the 1st trimester (3 months)

20. United States v. Nixon (1974)
SUPREME COURT CASES
United States v. Nixon (1974)
Issue: Separation of Power – Checks & Balances
Court Case: During the pres election of 1972, a group C.R.E.E.P. broke into DNC headquarters. During investigation, Pres Nixon was linked to the group & court issued a subpoena for him to turn over audiotapes of White House conversations. Nixon refused saying he had executive privilege.
Court Ruling: Against Nixon. Ruled executive privilege didn’t apply, bc wasn’t matter of national security. Nixon eventually resigned from office.
Precedent: Executive Privilege exists, must show national security.

21. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
SUPREME COURT CASES
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
Issue: 14th Amendment (Equal Protection)
Court Case: Bakke applied to University of California at Davis Medical School. The school admitted 100 students per year. 84 spots were open to all people, 16 were for minorities/low income people (Affirmative Action). Bakke (white) was denied admission, but was more qualified than many of the 16 minority applicants. Bakee sued because of the school’s admission policy.
Court Ruling: In favor of Bakke.
Precedent: Affirmative Action cases
would be decided on a case by case
basis.

22. SUPREME COURT CASES New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)
Issue: 4th Amendment (Search & Seizure)
Court Case: T.L.O. was accused of smoking in the bathroom at a high school. She denied & her purse was searched. Officials found cigs, papers, pot, stack of $1 bills, & list of students who owed her $. T.L.O. appealed her expulsion saying her 4th Amendment rights were violated.
Court Decision: Ruled in favor of the school. Court stated that the need to keep guns & drugs out of school allowed school officials to be given greater freedom in searches.
Precedent: Reasonable Suspicion Rule for school searches. Limited the 4th Amendment rights of students.

23. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
SUPREME COURT CASES
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
Issue: 1st Amendment (Freedom of the Press)
Court Case: Group of former high school students sued a principal & school system bc the principal deleted an article they wrote about teenage pregnancy & divorce from the school newspaper.
Court Decision: Ruled in favor of the principal. The principal has the right to edit the paper & delete things they find inappropriate to maintain the educational environment.
Precedent: 1st Amendment rights of students limited.

24. SUPREME COURT CASES Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Issue: 1st Amendment & Flag Burning
Court Case: 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. Many groups protested. Johnson set fire to an American Flag as protest & was arrested; Texas banned the burning of Texas State Flag & US Flag. Johnson appealed saying the law violated his 1st Amendment rights.
Court Ruling: In favor of Johnson. As a result, some groups would like to add a Constitutional Amendment to ban flag burning as a form of protest.
Precedent: Flag burning protected by the 1st Amendment.

25. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)
SUPREME COURT CASES
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989)
Issue: 9th & 14th Amendment
Court Case: A Missouri Law banned the use of public funds, clinics, or government employed doctors from counseling or performing abortions, unless the mother’s life was in danger. The law was being questioned as a violation of the terms under Roe v. Wade.
Court Ruling: The court ruled in favor of the Missouri Law, stating that states do not have to provide money to perform abortions.
Precedent: States do not have to fund abortions.