English L3 S1 US

Plessy v. Ferguson 1896

A landmark Supreme Court case that upheld racial segregation under the doctrine of "separate but equal," allowing state-sponsored discrimination until it was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka 1954

overturns Plessy v. Ferguson. Jim Craw laws are abolished

Barron v. Baltimore 1833

the SC has no authority to apply the Bill of Rights to the States

Slaughterhouse Cases 1872

considered the privileges and immunities clause to apply the Bill of Rights to the States BUT then eliminated it

Gitlow v. New York 1925

SC uses the due process clause to apply the Bill of Rights to the States => was accepted

incorporation of the establishment clause

Palko v. Connecticut 1937

selective incorporation

Mapp v. Ohio 1961

the exclusionary rule was applied to the States

Gideon v. Wainwright 1963

SC ordered States to provide Counsel at State expense to indigent defendants in felony cases. 

the right to assistance of counsel in criminal cases is fundamental

Miranda v. Arizona 1966

MIRANDA RIGHTS: right to remain silent + right to an attorney. It is necessary to be mirandized

=> is also applied to the States

Benton v. Maryland 1969

incorporated the protection against double jeopardy

Loving v. Virginia 1967

ppe: To pass strict scrutiny, a law must be justified by a compelling governmental interest, it must be narrowly tailored to achieve its legitimate aim and must be the least restrictive means of achieving such an aim.

ex de l’arrêt:  SC struck down anti-miscegenation laws (which criminalized interracial marriage) because they violated both the right to substantive due process as well as the right to equal protection (race is a “suspect classification” and a law which imposes a severe burden on the exercise of a fundamental right or discriminates on the basis of race must pass strict scrutiny to be upheld under the Equal Protection Clause)

Obergefell v. Hodges 2015

SC strikes down same-sex marriage bans across the country as violations of Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause

Roe v. Wade 1973 + Dobbs v. Jackson 2022

abortion was made constitutional in 1973 and overturned in 2022

National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie 1977

hate speech is protected, right to PEACEFULLY assemble

Snyder v. Phelps 2011

hate speech at funeral of an American soldier is OK

very large definition of hate speech

Matal v. Tam 2017

definition of hate speech: “speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground”

Texas v. Johnson 1989

protects symbolic speech

example here: burn the American flag during an anti-government demonstration

Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L 2021

school district in Pennsylvania had violated the 1st Amendment by punishing a student for vulgar social media messages she had sent while she was not on school grounds

Zorach v. Clauson 1951

American institutions often presuppose a Supreme Being

Everson v. Board of Education 1947

incorporation of the Establishment clause

Lemon v. Kurtzmann 1971

LEMON TEST: test to establish whether a law violates the Establishment clause or not, 3 conditions:

• no legitimate secular purpose

• primary effect was to advance or inhibit a religion

• created an excessive entanglement of the government with religion

Marsh v. Chambers 1983

Nebraska legislature started each new legislative session with a prayer by official chaplain

American Legion et al. v. American Humanist Assn 2019 + Kennedy v. Bremerton School District 2022

abandons the lemon test

Engel v. Vitale 1962

religion coercition in schools does not need to be direct or physical to be present

Lee v. Weisman 1992

the Establishment Clause is violated when a public High School invites the clergy to offer public prayer as part of a graduation ceremony

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe 2000

students had no choice but to participate in an act of religious worship

Good News Club v. Milford Central School 2001

school argued that students aged 6 to 12 would feel coerced to participate in a private religious club if the school allowed the club to operate on school premises, even when prior parental consent was necessary to participate in the club, and even when club activities only took place after school hour BUT the SC says NO

Lynch v. Donnelly 1984

christmas crèche in a public buiding was accepted because christmas was represented as a cultural holiday + there was also a santa claus and a xmas tree (not only crèche)

ACLU v. county of Allegheny 1989

christmas crèche in a public building was not accepted becaus christmas was represented as a religious holiday

Reynolds v. United States 1879

polygamy was not allowed because it was a religiously motivated action and not a religious belief

Jacobson v. Massachusetts 1905

same thing as Reynolds v. US but for vaccination

Sherbert v. Verner 1963

religion prevents from working on Saturdays. SC ruled in favor of the employee.

=>if a government rule infringes on someones ability to practise their religion it must be justified by a compelling government interest

Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith 1990

neutral law with general applicability can limit religious freedom

City of Boerne v. Flores Archbishop of San Antonio 1997

Congress cannot enforce RFRA on State level. Can impose legislative rules on state level but not change the substance of a constitutional amendment without respecting the constitutional process

Terry v. Ohio 1968

Stop and Frisk as exception to the 4th Amendment

Illinois v. Perkins 1990

undercover questioning by disguised officer does not require Miranda warnings

New York v. Quarles 1984

public safety exception

Missouri v. Frye 2012

defendant have right to effective counsel during plea bargaining

Tinker v. Des Moins Independent Community 1969

wearing a black armband in protest against war is protected by symbolic speech

Ward v. Rock against Racism 1989

government can place content-neutral based time, place or manner of expression restriction

Salinas v. Texas 2013

a suspects refusal to answer questions could be introduced as evidence in court, even if the questioning occured before the person had been arrested or read their Miranda rights

=> exception to general principle that silence cannot be used as evidence of guilt

Hurtado v. California 1884

SC refused to incorporate the Grand Jury clause 

Groppi v. Wisconsin 1971

due to pretrial publicity or other factors, local prejudice against the defendant is so great that he or she cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial, the case may be transferred to a court in another district

=> a motion for a change of venue

Brady v. Maryland 1963

Brady Rule: requires prosecutors when requested to disclose evidence which is material either to guilt or to punishment, which may help the defendant establish his innocence or lead to a reduction in his sentence. Failure to this is violation of due process of law

=> motion for discovery

Katz v. United States 1967

search was defined for the first time as an intrusion into someone’s reasonable expectation of privacy. Such an expectation is held to exist chen:

• an individual exhibits a personal expectation of privacy in relation to objects or information, ex. taking steps to prevent other people from accessing it

• society recognizes this expectation of privacy as being reasonable

Carpenter v. United States 2018

limits the third part doctrine. Cellphone location data records covering a 7-day period are protected by the Fourth Amendment because an individual maintains a legitimate expectation of privacy in the record of his physical movements even though the records were held by a cell phone company. 

US v. Jones 2012

the physical installation of a GPS device on the defendant’s car in order to track his movement constituted a search, since placing the device on the car constituted a trespass on personal effect

United States v. Grubbs 2006

def probable cause: fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a specified place.

Cupp v. Murphy 1973

evidence may be seized from an individual’s person or immediate possession when there is an imminent threat that it might be destroyed

Batson v. Kentucky 1986

the prosecution’s use of peremptory challenge against jurors based only on the race factor was a violation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause

Robinson v. California 1962

the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause was incorporated against the States

Furman v. Georgia 1972

following racial discrimination in capital trials, a 5-to-4 majority decided that capital punishment as practised then was unconstitutional since the judge and the jury lacked precise guidelines to ensure fairness in sentencing

=> facto moratorium on executions until the States demonstrated they adopted those guidelines

Gregg v. Georgia 1976

First Stage: guilt or innocence

Second Stage: aggravating or mitigating circumstances to reach a decision on the sentence

=> was accepted by the SC

Flowers v. Mississippi 2019

Sc founds that prosecutor in his six trials exhibited a pattern of striking as many Black prospective jurors as possible and, more specifically, had committed a Batson violation in the 6th Amendment.

McCoy v. Louisiana 2018

a defense attorney cannot admit in court that their client is guilty, even as a part of a strategy to spare them a death sentence, if their client wishes to maintain their not-guilty plea

Baze v. Rees 2008

SC upheld the use of Kentucky’s three-drug protocol, but some justices indicated that other cocktails or drugs may not be upheld

Glossip v. Gross 2015

SC upheld the use of controversial sedative midazolam in executions.  + new standards following Baze. On top of proving the method they are challenging presents a substantial risk of causing severe pain, a death row inmate has to offer an alternative method of execution that is feasible and readily implemented. 

Atkins v. Virginia 2002

execution of mentally retarded was declared unconstitutional

Ropper v. Simons 2005

execution of defendants under 18 when committed crime was declared unconstitutional

Hall v. Florida 2014

SC struck down Floridas strict IQ cutoff for determining intellectual disability

=> capital defendant with an IQ of 70 or less could be found intelectually disabled but not one with IG of 71. 

Madison v. Alabama 2017

SC ruled that an inmate whose multiple strokes led him to not be able to remember his crime anymore might be ineligible for execution if his memory loss was also accompanied by an inability to understand why the State was seeking to execute him

Kennedy v. Louisiana 2008

death penalty has only been allowed for murder

Woodson v. North Carolina 1976

the use of mandatory death sentences has been rejected

Graham v. Florida 2010

sentencing juveniles to life without the option of parole was unconstitutional for a crime other than murder

Miller v. Alabama 2012

mandatory life without the option of parole for juveniles murderers was unconstitutional

Montgomery v. Alabama 2016

Miller v. Alabama should apply retroactively

Jones v. Mississippi 2021

judges do not have to find a juvenile convicted of murder permanently incorrigible to be allowed to sentence them to life without the option of parole

United States v. Booker 2005

sentencing guidelines were challenged and SC confirmed they should not be mandatory

masterpiece cakeshop v. colorado civil rights colission 2018

governmental action at state level = was refused

Pointer v. Texas 1965

incorporation of right to confrontation because is a fundamental right