Supreme Court Cases

all 35 cases

Mabury v. Madison (1803)

1. After Jefferson defeated Adams, Adams went and created the Judiciary Act of 1803, which added new courts and judges evidently giving the president more power over judges; William Marbury was appointed in the District of Columbia and he petitioned James Madison to deliver documents

2. Questioned whether the Supreme Court has authority to review acts of Congress and declare them unconstitutional; focuses on article III of the constitution, article III defines judicial powers including Supreme Court authority

3. Gave the Supreme Court Power; deemed acts unconstitutional if they contradict the Constitution, establishing the principle of judicial review

4. declared Madison’s refusal to deliver documents illegal, but instead of returning him to Marbury, they decided to declare the Judiciary Act unconstitutional It allows courts to really go into depth when investigating legislative and executive actions. This case also ensures the Constitution remains powerful

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

1. The second bank of the US if 1816 and in 1818 Maryland passed legislation imposing taxes on the bank. McCulloch refused to pay taxes, making the state appeals court decide that it was unconstitutional

2. Questioned if Congress had the authority to establish banks. involved Article I; necessary and proper clause

3. Established federal supremacy over state laws and confirmed the constitutionality of the Bank of the United States.

4. This case reinforced the power of the Federal Government and established implied powers

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

1. a 20-year monopoly was gifted to Livingston and Ogden tried to stop it from happening. Livingston ended up succeeding and purchased competitors’ boats. Thomas Gibbons, who was a steamboat owner, made a partnership with Odgen but it eventually ended after 3 years because of a betrayal on Gibbons’ end. Ogden filed a lawsuit and New York court denied Gibbon’s claim saying that Congress controlled interstate commerce

2. Questioned if the commerce clause gave Congress authority over interstate commerce. Involves Article I, specifically the Commerce Clause

3. Established federal control over interstate commerce, ruling that states cannot regulate commerce that crosses state lines.

4. Allows federal government to regulate interstate commerce; led to numerous law regulations

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

1. The Separate Car Act was an act that separated blacks and whites on trains. Plessy, who was partially white, sat in a white-only car. When he was told to leave, he refused.

2. Questioned if the Separate Care Act violates the Fourteenth Amendment

3. Upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine.

4. Society is desegregated now, but the effects of this led to civil rights

Schenck v. U.S. (1919)

1. Schenck and Baer distributed leaflets declaring the draft violated the Thirteenth Amendment. The leaflet encouraged people to go against the draft. Schenck was charged and convicted.

2. Questioned if Schenck's conviction under the Espionage Act for criticizing the draft violated his First Amendment right to freedom of speech

3. ruling that free speech could be limited in times of clear and present danger.

4. established the “clear and present danger” test for investigating speech under the First Amendment

Gitlow v. New York (1925)

1. Gitlow was arrested for delivering a manifesto that suggested socialism. He was convicted under New York and Gitlow argues that since nothing resulted from his manifesto, he shouldn't be charged

2. Questioned if the First Amendment prevents a state from punishing political speech that directly advocates the government's violent overthrow.

3. allowed infringements on freedom of speech if it resulted in danger or violence to the public

4. applied freedom of speech protections to the states through 14 amendment

Korematsu v. U.S. (1944)

1. America secluded Japanese Americans to camps in separated areas to help improve the integrity of the country during the war. Korematsu was a Japanese man who decided not to leave his home and he got arrested because of it. He argued that this executive order went against the 5th amendment

2. Questioned if the President and Congress went beyond their war powers by implementing exclusion and restricting the rights of Americans of Japanese descent. Involved the 5th amendment

3. justified excluding Japanese Americans from specific places because of the state of the country during the war

4. A lot of Japanese Americans are still discriminated because of this executive order

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

1. focused on the desegregation of public schools. It was argued that segregation violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment

2. Questioned if segregation of public education based solely on race violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

3. deemed segregated schools unconstitutional and mandated desegregation in public education.

4. This case helped get rid of segregation and moved us to the present setting.

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

1. Mapp was convicted of possessing contraband. Her house was searched illegally while looking for a fugitive and she appealed

2. Questioned if the confiscated materials are protected from seizure by the Fourth Amendment.

3. declared search and seizure without probable cause unconstitutional; established the search warrant

4. This case helped created the process of police obtaining search warrants

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

1. New York board temporarily allowed prayer in public schools. A group of organizations then joined in challenging the integrity of public prayer

2. Questioned if reading prayer in public schools violated the First Amendment

3. prohibited prayer in public schools, even if participation isn’t required

4. This case made it so public prayer would only be a private school thing; it even contributed to the rise of catholic schools.

Baker v. Carr (1962)

1. ordered districts to be as equal as possible

2. involves the 14th amendment

3. addressed the issue of legislative apportionment and established the principle of "one person, one vote."

4. helped establish equal representation, making sure every vote made an impact

Abbington v. Schempp (1963)

1. A Pennsylvania school district required bible study in public schools. Edmund Schempp argued that it violated the Establishment Clause

2. involves the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from establishing an official sense of religion

3. restricted bible readings in public schools

4. this case continues to influence public schools today and what is allowed to be expressed in them.

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

1. Gideon was a drifter who was charged with burglary in Florida. The Florida judge denied Gideon’s request for a lawyer. Gideon then argued from prison that his conviction was unconstitutional because he was denied counsel.

2. Questioned whether the 6th amendments right to counsel applies to state courts through the Fourteenth amendment

3. ruling that said lawyers should be provided to anyone who cannot afford one

4. This case helped provide many people who cannot afford it with a lawyer to help their case.

Wesberry v. Sanders (1963)

1. Wesberry was a vote in one of Georgia’s districts and he sued the governor because he believed that the district lines were unconstitutional

2. Questioned whether Georgia’s congressional districts violated the Constitution. Involved Article I of the Constitution

3. enforced equal populated house districts

4. This case ensured that district lines were equal, representing a variety of people.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)

1. New York Times published an advertisement criticizing the treatment of civil rights protestors in the South. Sullivan, who was a public official, sued the company arguing that the ad contained factual inaccuracies

2. Questioned whether a public official can sue for defamation without proving actual malice

3. public figures must prove “actual malice” to win a case

4. This case shaped what is today modern freedom of press and the defamation law

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S. (1964)

1. A hotel located in Georgia that didn’t rent to black tourists. The Civil Rights Act was then passed and it banned racial discrimination. The motel owner then sued the government arguing that the Civil Rights Act was unconstitutional

2. Questioned whether Congress had the power to prohibit racial discrimination in public settings. Involved the Commerce Clause

3. prohibits racial discrimination in public settings

4. This case helped shape and enforce the Civil Rights law

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)

1. Connecticut had a law banning the use of birth control. Griswold, a director of Planned Parenthood made a clinic made for distributing contraceptives. He was then arrested. He argued that the rule violated the constitutional right to privacy

2. Questioned whether a state law banning contraceptives was unconstitutional

3. established rights to privacy

4. This case laid down the fundamental foundation of Legal precedent for Reproductive rights

Miranda v. Arizona (1965)

1. Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping. During his interrogation, he was not informed of his rights. His confession was used against him and he was arrested. Miranda argued that his confession was not valid because he had not been informed of his rights.

2. Questioned whether statements made during an interrogation could be used as evidence

3. established Miranda rights

4. This case strengthened the importance of being read your rights when being put into custody.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)

1. A group of high school students wore black wristbands to protest the Vietnam War. They were sent to the office and then suspended because of their protest. The kids’ mother then sued arguing that suspending them violated their right to expression

2. Questioned whether prohibiting peaceful symbolic protesting violated the student’s freedom of speech

3. Established that students in public school continue to have First Amendment rights

4. made sure that public school students had the right to expression.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

1. States, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island made statutes that paid for non-secular, non-public schools. A statute

2. Questioned if funding to non-public schools violates the Establishment Clause

3. Established test to determine if an establishment clause is violated

4. This case helped influence the ruling and spread of school prayer on public property

New York Time Co. v. United States (1971)

1. In 1967 a classified study of information on the Vietnam war was commissioned to be published. A former military analyst leaked the information to New York Times and they published the newspapers. It was taken to court arguing that it endangered national security

2. Questioned if the government’s attempt to stop the spread of the Pentagon Papers a violation of the First Amendment

3. Reinforced the right to publication by press, even if it involves sensitive information

4. Any new publishers can release information of any sort without any worry of having to remove it

Wisconsin v. Yonder (1972)

1. Three Amish families refused to send their children to school past 8th grade because they believed it conflicted their beliefs. They were then taken to court and others argued that it violated the attendance law

2. Questioned if Wisconsin’s attendance law violated the right to religion

3. Amish families are legally allowed to pull their children out of school at the age of 16

4. This case strengthen religious freedom and beliefs throughout the country

Roe v. Wade (1973)

1. A woman in Texas got pregnant and wanted to get an abortion, but Texas only allowed if it of it was to save the mother’s life. It was then taken to court saying that this violated her right to privacy

2. Questioned if Texas banning abortions violates a woman’s constitutional right under the fourteenth amendment

3. The Court decided the Due Process Clause of the fourteenth amendment included abortion rights

4. This case legalized abortion nationwide, but it was recently overturned

U.S. v Nixon (1974)

1. five men broke into the Democratic National Committee headquarters. It was said that it had to do with Nixon’s reelection to which he had also covered up the situation

2. Questioned if the President has a right to withhold information under executive privilege

3. The Court decided that executive privilege does not protect the president from giving up evidence

4. This case enforced rule of law and makes sure executive privilege isn’t used to delay justice

Buckley v Valeo (1976)

1. FECA was passed after watergate and it limited campaign expenditures to reduce the influence of money. Senator Buckley challenged the law saying that it violated the right to free speech

2. Questioned if campaign limitations violated the first amendment

3. The Court decided to chop and screw FECA to make it more fair

4. established the “money equals speech” principle and made a difference between contributions and expenditures

Gregg v. Georgia (1976)

1. Troy Leon Gregg was a man convicted of a crime and sentenced to death under the new death penalty law. Gregg then argued the case saying that his sentencing was a violation of the eighth amendment

2. Questioned if Georgia’s new death penalty law violated the eighth amendment prohibition of unusual punishment

3. The Court approved to Georgia’s state law, saying that the death penalty itself was not unconstitutional

4. This case reinstated the death penalty in the US under new state laws. It also made rise of new execution methods

Texas v. Johnson (1989)

1. During the Republican National Convention, a man named Gregory Johnson was protesting against president Reagan. Johnson burner an American flag during his protest and he was then arrested and charged. Johnson then appealed, arguing that him being arrested was a violation of the first amendment

2. Questioned whether Johnson’s conviction was a violation of his right to free speech

3. The ruled that the burning of the flag is a form of symbolic speech, which falls under the first amendment

4. This case helped enforce that fact that the government can’t punish people for unpopular political actions unless it inflicts violence

Shaw v. Reno (1993)

1. After a census in North Carolina, a Congressional seat was gained and they needed to redraw their district lines. Their initial plan was rejected because the majority of one of their districts consisted of African Americans. North Carolina then redrew the line, making it unnecessarily large. The state was then sued, arguing that the district line was unconstitutional and an attempt to segregate voters by race

2. Questioned if North Carolina’s racially gerrymandered district line was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause

3. Declared redistricting strictly on race unconstitutional and a violation of the Equal Protection Clause

4. This case helped establish judicial scrutiny for any suspiciously drawn district lines

U.S. v. Lopez (1995)

1. ALfonso Lopez was a high schooler in Texas who brought a gun an bullets to school. He was then arrested under state law for firearm possession on school property. He was then federally charged and Lopez’s lawyers argued that the GFSZA was unconstitutional

2. Questioned if Congress had the authority under the Commerce Clause to pass a Gun free school zone act

3. Ruled that having a gun at school is not an economic matter and does not fall under the Commerce Clause

4. This case was the time since the new Deal that the Court limited Congress power

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)

1. Cleveland schools were having financial issues and Ohio then established the Pilot Protect SCholarship program. This program offered vouchers and financial aid

2. Questioned if Ohio’s voucher violated the Established Clause

3. The court ruled that the program was neutral with opportunities for all

4. This case established voucher programs for and stated that they don't violate the Establishment Clause

Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

1. Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher were white applicants who applied to Michigan University and were denied admission. They then sued the university saying that the policy was unconstitutional

2. Questioned if the university denying them violated the Equal Protection Clause

3. They deemed the denial of them unconstitutional and that their policies were too narrow

4. This made it so college’s can’t be biased towards race and ethnic backgrounds

Citizens United v. FEC (2010)

1. Citizens wanted to advertise a political film within 30 days of the Democratic primaries

2. Questioned if the independent political expenditures violated the first amendment

3. Deemed that independent expenditures was a part of freedom of speech.

4. Led to modern day PAC’s and unlimited mounts of spending for corporations and unions

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)

1. A chicago resident bought a gun for self defense and chicago made a handgun ban. The man then sued the city saying that it violated the second amendment

2. Questioned if the second amendment included the right to beararms through the fourteenth amendment

3. Ruled that bearing arms is a fundamental right by the second amendment

4. Extended the constituional right to bear arms in state governments

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)

1. Obergfell, a same-sex married man, had a terminally ill husband. He was denied acknowledgement on the death certificate in Ohio

2. Questioned if the refusal of acknowledgment violated Equal Protection Rights

3. Court deemed that disregarding legal marriage from other states unconstitutional

4. Made an impact on the rise of same sex marriage throughout legal states

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022)

1. This case based in Mississippi focused on prohibiting apportion after 15 weeks. Mississippi argued that getting an abortion is not a right stated in the Constitution.

2. Questioned if an abortion is an implied right protected by the Tenth and fourteenth amendment

3. Ruled that the Constitution makes no reference to the right to an abortion

4. This case eventually led to the overturning of Roe v. Wade