[AP Gov/APUSH] Court Cases and Acts

Dartmouth College v. Woodward

1819: Established Constitution’s protection of all contracts (important for private property)

Gibbons v. Ogden

1824: Established Congress’ power over interstate commerce

Worcester v. Georgia

1832: Came about under Jackson’s term. Debated whether Georgia’s government had the authority to relocate the natives unto reservations. Marshall declared it to be unconstitutional, yet Jackson relocated the Natives either way (Trail of Tears)

Dredd Scott v. Sanford

1856: Dredd Scott, a former slave, questioned his status after being transferred to outside of Missouri state line. Declared that Congress has no right to deny states property (slaves) and, as such, that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional.

• drove a lot of white settlers to the Republican Party

Wabash Case

1886: Case between Pacific Co. v. Illinois. Denounced the Illinois Granger Laws to be unconstitutional from infringing upon Congress’ Interstate Commerce Powers. Placed federal superiority and stated that only the government can effectively regulate the railroads

Plessy v. Ferguson

1896: Established “separate but equal” and created legal segregation in United States.

Background: Plessy, a 7/8 white and 1/8 man took a seat in a Louisiana railway train reserved for whites only, while being a colored man. He sued because his racial make up was primarily white, not colored. He lost.

Passed because: 13th Amendment abolishes slavery, and there is no servitude being contended with in segregation. 14th Amendment ensures equal rights, and equal rights is possible with segregation so long as “one side of the street is as good as the other.”

Schenck v. United States

1919: Established that Freedom of speech can be limited for national security

Background: Schenck used his free speech to oppose the draft, passing out anti-drat leaflets. He lost, giving the government extraordinary powers in the presence of “clear and present danger.” Under the Sedition Acts, the gov’t can convict people for speaking out (in this case, against WWI)

Passed because: Free speech can’t protect dangerous speech.

Korematsu v. United States

1944: Korematsu sued the government’s Executive Order 9066 (Japanese internment) on the basis of his status as an American citizen. US court used Schenck case’s precedent to go through with it anyway despite his justifiable plea to court

Escobedo v. Ilinois

1964: States that the accused have the right to consult his attorney anytime during the investigation

Miranda v. Arizona

1966: Civil Rights case ruling that policemen must inform anybody their rights before their arrest

Bakke v. U.C. Regents

1978: Ruled there cannot be a racial quota (ratio) in the admission process

Background: Bakke applied to Davis twice, only to be barred from admittance because of his demographics as a white man due to the reserved spots for colored students, of which got a lower score than him.

Passed because: Under the 14th Amendment, they must have their equal protections applied in the same way during the admissions process in order to be equal. Having a ratio guarantee an admission of one student over another is unfair.

Citizen’s United v. Federal Election Commission

[Campaign Finance] Ruled that Corporations have Free Speech

Background: Citizens United is a non-profit organization that piled together to create an ad against Hillary Clinton. The FEC deemed it to be inappropriate and filed a case.

Passed because: People make up corporations. Corp. therefore act as an extension of people and is an amplification of their First Amendment rights.

Marbury v. Madison

[Judicial Review] Established the precedent of the Supreme Court having power of Judicial Review

Background: Jefferson and Adams were fighting over their presidency during the lame duck period with the assignment of Midnight Judges. Judicial Act of 1787 directed it so that the Supreme Court would be in charge of handling presidential disputes.

Passed because: Although Marshall chastised the Jefferson administration for blocking Adams’ midnight judge appointee, he turned focus to the Legislation that assigned the case in the first place. A3 S2 said that the judicial can only act as original court for ambassadors and not pres. disputes → re-evaluated Judicial Act of 1787 to be void and unconstitutional

Baker v. Carr

Declared that state apportioning must account for population equally

Background: Mayor of Memphis, Baker, sued state legislature as state apportionment didn’t account for the booming of populous districts and gave them the same amount of representatives as a lesser populated district

Passed because: Having votes registered to be under its value is a breach of voter’s equal protection clause (Amendment 14)

Reno v. Shaw

Apportionment based on race is unconstitutional

Background: U.S. Attorney General rejected a North Carolinan gerrymandering plan as it only showed one African-American district. North Carolinan citizens appealed, disagreeing with racial gerrymandering

Passed because: Racial gerrymandering resembles racial segregating lines in neighborhoods. Also, infringes on voting equally for all persons (14th Amendment), as race isn’t the only factor in political thought

McCulloch v. Maryland

[Elastic Clause] Congress has powers to establish a federal bank and commit to any actions necessary and proper to upholding the Constitution

Background: McCulloch, a cashier at the second bank of America, refused to pay the tax that Maryland imposed by legislation. Got appealed to the Supreme Court and was ruled in favor of McCulloch on March 6th, 1819.

Passed because: Federal government reigns supreme over the states, thus, states should not be able to tax a federal bank (Vertical Federalism)

United States v. Lopez

[Commerce Clause] States reserve their sovereign rights when government’s actions trespass their permitted powers

Background: Alfonzo Lopez was charged for obstructing both state and federal law for bringing a concealed weapon to school. However, when charged for a federal crime on the basis of obstructing the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (a Federal Law), the courts found the prior’s laws’ reasoning to be unconstitutional.

Passed because: The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 is a misuse of the Commerce Clause, as guns aren’t something that can be regulated on the basis of interstate commerce, but rather, is a state reserved (unenumerated power to Congress) right.

Brown v. Board of Education

1954: Segregation is “inherently unconstitutional”

Background: Mr. Brown sued, finding that his daughter is facing an unfair disadvantage by having to travel further away to her school when there is a closer school nearby, yet she is banned to attend because it’s an all-white school.

Passed because: Though facilities may be equal the basis of separation instills an inferiority that deprives students of equal opportunity.

Title IX (Education Amendments Act of 1972)

1972: A mandate that prohibits discrimination based on sex in education programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance

Americans with Disability Act

1993: Bans discrimination against disabilities including employment, transportation, public buildings, and access to state and local government programs and services

Lawrence v. Texas

2003: Declared sodomy laws in Texas unconstitutional, after they were used to persecute an LGBT couple

Obergefell v. Hodges

2015: Declared the right to marry a protected constitutional right, regardless of sexual orientation

Griswold v. Connecticut

1965: The court argued there is a penumbra from the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th amendment that ensures enumerated rights (privacy) to birth control.

Yates v. US

1957: Leader of a communist party was convicted for creating unrest when he was just promoting a communist lifestyle. Yates won because Unprotected speech must advocate action in order to be unprotected speech.

Brandenburg v. Ohio

1969: KKK leader was invited by a TV reporter to cover a Klan rally. Announced that they would get revenge on minorities by holding a rally later that month and was convicted on dangerous speech. Brandenburg won because it didn’t violate the test that Unprotected speech must encourage imminent action

Miller v. California

1971: Miller sent out obscene brochures by mail and was arrested. CA won because what he had sent out in the brochure was obscene, violating the three tests that the court made:

1. theme appealed to inappropriate sexual desires by modern standards

2. shows clear offensive way sexual behavior outlawed by state law

3. lacks serious literary artistic political or scientific value

Reno v. ACLU

1997: Court ruled the Communications Decency Act to be unconstitutional because it was “overly broad and vague” in regulating Internet speech

Tinker v. Des Moines

1969: Symbolic speech is protected speech

Background: Students were wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam war. Parents sued and the case was appealed to the Supreme Court

Passed because: Symbolic speech is still protected speech, even at school.

Texas v. Johnson

1989: Flag burning is a protected form of symbolic speech

Near v. Minnesota

1931: Ruled that it is unconstitutional to question speech/restrain it, prior to its publication (14th Amendment)

New York Times v. US

1971: Prior restraint of Press is Unconstitutional

Background: A Pentagon employee leaked important information to the New York Times, which the Nixon administration tried to suppress.

Passed because: Deemed unconstitutional to have held a prior restriction of press, regardless if it was sensitive information. The press has the right to leak information even on the government as it can expose deception in the government - a right of the people.

New York Times v. Sullivan

1964: NYT published an ad on Sullivan, which he sued for on the basis of libel (defamation). Though he was right, the Courts ruled it unconstitutional for him to win a defamation case simply on the basis of inaccuracy of the ad. The ad should have had malicious or ill intent in order for it to be defamation (NYT won)

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier

1988: A principal prevented student newspapers from being published because it dealt with sensitive topics, wherein one of the newspaper journalist sued on the basis of their First Amendment being revoked. The court ruled in favor for the school district as schools can censor student newspapers when it creates a concern for the educating process.

Engel v. Vitale

1962: Laws establishing one religion over another (though voluntary) is unconstitutional

Background: Board of Regents in New York proposed a prayer to start the day. Jewish man sued, saying it revoked the first Amendment.

Passed because: The prayer established a monotheistic religion that, though the prayer was optional, ultimately promoted one religion over another. A breach of the Establishment clause.

Wisconsin v. Yoder

1878: Free exercise of belief outweighs law

Background: Amish family wanted their kids to be pulled out of education early as per their beliefs, but Wisconsin law said they can’t be pulled out until they are 16 years old.

Passed because: Free exercise clause, and there was no compelling interest of the majority if only the Amish students dropped out of their own accord

Lemon v. Kurtzman

1971: States were found supplying money to religious, private schools. The court ruled in favor for Lemon, saying that state funding of religious schools violates the Establishment clause.

Reynolds v. US

1872: Reynolds reasoned that having multiple wives was essential to his religion (LDS), but the court firmly established that participating in polygamy and the LDS religion is a case of practice and belief. The gov’t had a compelling interest to ban polygamy federally, as it affected the majority.

NAACP v. Alabama

1958: Alabama claimed that NAACP caused issues for the state, and that led to “injury to the property and civil rights of the residents of Alabama,” but prior to the case, a subpoena was issued to acquire the papers of the NAACP members, and the case was contending whether or not the courts had the ability to do such. Ultimately, The court ruled the right to associate is necessary for any right to assemble and ruled in favor for NAACP. Subpoenas are to assemble people, not to gather their personal information.

Brazenburg v. Hayes

1972: A reporter, Brazenburg, has sources on writing a newspaper for drug usage. He was asked to be a testify at a drug trial, with the fact that he was a first hand witness. The Supreme court ruled that the right to a fair trial outweighed his privacy as a journalist (without the presence of shield laws) and he had to testify.

Mapp v. Ohio

1961: Dollree “Dolly” Mapp was involved in gambling, and so the Cleveland police were suspicious a convict might show up at her house and interrogated her upon his whereabouts. In her refusal to comply they confiscated pornography books that she was in possession of, and the Supreme Court found it unconstitutional as the evidence was found in violation of the Fourth Amendment (Privacy rights fall under a penumbra). They didn’t have a warrant.

Barron v. Baltimore

Public works project caused Barron’s port to go bad. He sued. Supreme Court dismissed the case, saying that the Bill of Rights didn’t apply to states.

Became the basis of selective incorporation (Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law..)

Gitlow v. New York

1925: Gitlow was a socialist who was passing out fliers promoting his socialist ideals. He was arrested on New York’s law for advocating overthrowal of the government. The Supreme Court ruled that 14th Amendment mirrored the 5th, thus the states are subjected to the Bill of Rights, selectively incorporating the First Amendment to defend Gitlow.

(Amendment 5: nor be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law)

(Amendment 14: nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law)

D.C. v. Heller

2008: Anthony Heller was a special D.C. police officer who was authorized to carry a handgun. He wanted to apply for a handgun to be kept after his service, but his application was denied. He sued the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of him, basing on the argument that if the restrictions make it so that the weapon can’t be used, it becomes an abridgment of the right to bear arms.

McDonald v. Chicago

2010: McDonald had been repeatedly robbed and unwilling to use his arms of a shotgun, vying for a handgun instead. Chicago, however, has a handgun ban. This case got appealed to the Supreme Court, wherein they ruled in his favor, saying that the right to bear arms has been a basic right for centuries.

Gideon v. Wainwright

1963: Gideon was accused of stealing but didn’t have a lawyer. In his lack of a counsel, he asked for Florida for a lawyer, but they had a law that lawyers were only provided for those who were poor and on death row. Supreme Court ruled for Gideon, saying that a counsel is a necessity, not a luxury.

Furman v. Georgia

1972: Burglarized a house and shot the home owner. Was on death row, but the Supreme Court (Brennen) ruled that death penalty is random and freakish (Furman won).

Gregg v. Georgia

1976: Hitch-hiker asked for a ride and murdered those who gave him a ride. Was put on death row, and Supreme Court ruled that the crime fit the punishment.