Constitutional Law Key Supreme Court Cases on Civil Rights and Free Speech Review

Lochner v. NY (1905) Facts:

New York passed a law limiting how many hours bakers could work each week.

Lochner v. NY (1905) Issue:

Did the law violate the freedom of contract under the 14th Amendment?

Lochner v. NY (1905) Ruling:

Yes. The Court struck down the law, saying it interfered with an individual's right to make contracts. 5-4 ruling

Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Facts:

Black students were forced to attend separate public schools from white students.

Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Issue:

Is racial segregation in public schools constitutional?

Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Ruling:

No. The Court ruled that "separate but equal" schools are unconstitutional because segregation is inherently unequal. 9-0 ruling

Loving v. Virginia (1967) Facts:

An interracial couple was arrested for getting married in violation of Virginia law.

Loving v. Virginia (1967) Issue:

Do laws banning interracial marriage violate the Constitution?

Loving v. Virginia (1967) Ruling:

Yes. The Court ruled these laws unconstitutional under the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. 9-0 ruling

Griswold v. CT (1965) Facts:

Connecticut banned the use of contraceptives, even by married couples.

Griswold v. CT (1965) Issue:

Does the Constitution protect a right to privacy?

Griswold v. CT (1965) Ruling:

Yes. The Court ruled the law unconstitutional and recognized a constitutional right to privacy. 7-2 ruling

Roe v. Wade (1973) Facts:

A Texas law banned most abortions. Texas made abortion illegal except to save the mother's life.

Roe v. Wade (1973) Issue:

Does the Constitution protect a woman's right to choose an abortion?

Roe v. Wade (1973) Ruling:

Yes (at the time). The Court ruled abortion was protected by the right to privacy under the 14th Amendment. 7-2 ruling

Lawrence v. Texas (2003) Facts:

Police arrested two men in Texas for having private, consensual sex, which was illegal under a Texas sodomy law.

Lawrence v. Texas (2003) Issue:

Does a state law banning consensual same-sex sexual activity violate the Constitution?

Lawrence v. Texas (2003) Ruling:

Yes. The Court ruled the law unconstitutional, saying adults have a right to privacy and liberty under the Due Process Clause. 6-3 ruling

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) Facts:

Same-sex couples sued states that refused to allow or recognize same-sex marriages.

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) Issue:

Does the Constitution require states to allow and recognize same-sex marriage?

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) Ruling:

Yes. The Court held that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right protected by the 14th Amendment. 5-4 ruling

Free Speech Intro Facts:

The First Amendment protects freedom of speech from government interference.

Free Speech Intro Issue:

Can the government limit speech, and if so, when?

Free Speech Intro Ruling:

Speech is generally protected, but the government can limit it in certain cases (like threats, incitement, or national security).

Schenck v. US (1919) Facts:

Charles Schenck distributed pamphlets encouraging people to resist the military draft during World War I.

Schenck v. US (1919) Issue:

Does free speech protect speech that interferes with the draft?

Schenck v. US (1919) Ruling:

No. The Court upheld Schenck's conviction and said speech can be limited if it creates a clear and present danger. 9-0 ruling

Clear & Present Danger Facts:

Developed in Schenck v. U.S. to judge limits on free speech.

Clear & Present Danger Issue:

When can the government restrict speech?

Clear & Present Danger Ruling:

The government can restrict speech if it poses a clear and immediate danger to public safety or national security.

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) Facts:

A Ku Klux Klan leader gave a speech promoting violence against the government.

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) Issue:

Can the government punish speech that promotes violence?

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) Ruling:

No, unless it is meant to cause imminent lawless action. The Court created a stronger free-speech protection standard. 9-0 ruling

(Economic Liberty in Progressive Era) Muller v. Oregon (1908) Theme:

The Court allowed government regulation of labor when it claimed to protect women's health, showing limits on freedom of contract and acceptance of gender-based laws.

(Economic Liberty in Progressive Era) Buchanan v Warley (1917) Theme:

The Court struck down racial zoning laws, showing that property rights and freedom of contract could be used to challenge racial discrimination.

(Economic Liberty in Progressive Era) Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923) Theme:

The Court protected freedom of contract by striking down minimum wage laws, continuing the Lochner-era resistance to economic regulation.

(Economic Liberty through the New Deal) O'Gorman & Young v. Hartford Fire (1931) Theme:

The Court upheld economic regulation, signaling a shift toward allowing more government control over business practices.

(Economic Liberty through the New Deal) Nebbia v. NY (1934) Theme:

The Court expanded government power to regulate the economy, ruling that states may regulate private industry in the public interest.

(Economic Liberty through the New Deal) West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937) Theme:

The Court upheld minimum wage laws, marking the end of the Lochner era and accepting broader government regulation of the economy.

(Personal Liberty in Progressive Era) Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) Theme:

The Court recognized individual liberties under the Due Process Clause, including parents' rights to control their children's education.

(Personal Liberty in Progressive Era) Pierce v. Society of Sisters Theme:

The Court protected parental rights and educational choice, ruling that the state cannot force children to attend public schools only.

(Personal Liberty in Progressive Era) Buck v. Bell (1927) Theme:

The Court allowed the government to limit individual rights in the name of public welfare, showing weak protection of civil liberties at the time.

(Economic Liberty After New Deal) US v. Carolene (1938) Theme:

The Court established rational basis review for economic regulation and suggested stronger protection for minority rights (Footnote Four).

(Economic Liberty After New Deal) Williamson v. Lee Optical (1955)Theme:

The Court showed extreme deference to legislatures, upholding economic regulations even if they seem inefficient or unreasonable.