AP Gov Unit 3: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights

article 3 of the constitution

“The Judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish”; establishes: Lifetime terms unless impeached, They’ll get paid, Jurisdiction, Definition of treason; shortest of the 3 articles regarding parts of the government; 1 supreme court, Whatever courts congress approves or establishes

judiciary act of 1789

• Established the current 3 tier federal court system

what were the 3 tiers of the federal court system established in the judiciary act of 1789

district courts, court of appeals, and SCOTUS

district courts

• Original jurisdiction in federal matters

• Trial courts at the federal level with a few exception

• 94 District courts across the 50 states, US territories, and DC

court of appeals

• 11 circuit courts for the country (district courts divided geographically)

• 1 circuit court for DC

• 1 for patent cases

• Each circuit as a SCOTUS Justice to act as an advisory

• Created in 1891 to ease SCOTUS workload

• Function as intermediate step between District courts and SCOTUS

SCOTUS justices

• Currently consists of 8 associate justices and 1 chief Justice for a total of 9

  • Judiciary Act originally established SCOTUS with 5 Associate Justices and 1 Chief

    • First Chief Justice John Jay

  • Increased to 7 total justices in 1807

  • Increased to 9 total justices in 1837

  • Increased to 10 total justices in 1863 (middle of the Civil War)

  • Decreased to 9 in 1869 which is where it’s been since

basic functions of the judiciary

justice system, civil law, check on legislature and executive, protecting rights

justice system

• Interpret laws, determine guilt, determine punishments

civil law

Family Law, Small Claims, Civil Suits

judiciary check on legislature and executive

• Can check both other branches through findings, opinions, verdicts, and judgments

how does the judiciary protect rights

• Similar to acting as a check the Courts can protect our individual rights through trial procedures, appellate decisions, civil suits, and other means

the civil process

• At times individuals, groups, or even the government, may feel the need to sue an entity for some reason

• The specific process for each suit depends on the particular type, who is suing who, and which stat it is taking place in

  • In many cases the actual lawsuit/trial never takes place and instead the dispute is settled out of court

  • For those that do go to court the process in court is fairly similar regardless of specific circumstances

reasons why civil lawsuits can be filed

• Violation of rights or civil rights

• Injury (Accidents, Medical malpractice, safety or liability)

• Workplace incidents

• Personal or property disputes

  • And others

civil suit process

• Both sides can call for witnesses to support their case

  • If someone doesn’t want to appear as a witness they can be subpoenaed (if they don’t show up they can be arrested for contempt of court)

• Attorneys for both sides will find witnesses first, once that is done they will get together and decide on a court date

  • Oftentimes there can be a long delay (years in some cases) for a trial date which is part of why so many cases are settled out of court

  • Complicating the process further either side can demand a jury trial if they so desire

    • This can lengthen the process as both sides’ attorneys have the ability to help select the jury

• Once the jury has been selected, or foregone, the trial will actually take place

  • Both sides present their witnesses, findings, opinions, and information to try and sway the judge and/or jury

• Once both sides have rested their case the jury will decide the winner

  • In civil suits most states do not require unanimous consent though some do

  • If a jury can’t decide, a hung jury or mistrial may be declared

  • Sometimes even in a jury trial the judge can make a final decision and overrule the jury

criminal cases versus civil cases

• Criminal cases are very different from civil cases

• While in civil suits it is alleged that someone did something wrong, in many cases they did not commit a crime

• In criminal cases a law was fully broken (allegedly) and so the process takes longer and it, in many wats, far more thorough

  • Despite this criminal cases oftentimes move more quickly than civil cases

criminal cases

• a law was fully broken (allegedly) and so the process takes longer and it, in many wats, far more thorough

criminal trial process

• After it is determined that a crime has occurred law enforcement agencies investigate to attempt to determine the perpetrator

• Once they have suspect/s in mind they must obtain an arrest warrant before they can officially place the suspect/s under arrest

  • Warrants are required by law and the Constitution (4A) and must be issued by a judge

• Once arrested the police have procedures they must follow regarding interrogation and imprisonment

• Eventually (and according to the 6A quickly) the accused must be brought before a judge

  • At this point there is a preliminary hearing to determine whether the current evidence is enough to proceed further

• If the judge agrees that the evidence is enough, and it is a major case, the prosecuting attorney will the create a bill of indictment

  • This bill, along with all evidence collected to this point, will be presented to a grand jury 

  • The grand jury will then determine whether or not the evidence is sufficient to go to trial with 12 of the 16-23 agreeing that it is

  • In between the preliminary hearing and the indictment proceedings the judge can release the defendant on bail 

• If the grand jury does not agree to the indictment the charges are dismissed and the accused is set free

• If the grand jury does agree they proceed to the actual trial

• To start the actual trial the defendant and their attorney will enter a plea during arraignment

  • The defendant can admit guilt and plea guilty in which case the rest of the trial skips straight ahead to sentencing

    • This is actually the most common plea

    • Many defense attorneys are public defenders overwhelmed with large caseloads

    • To try and minimize punishment for their clients and to get through their caseload as quickly as possible they will often plea bargain – agree to a guilty plea in exchange for lesser charges, lesser punishment or both

  • If the defendant enters a plea of not guilty then the judge sets a trial date

• If a not guilty plea is entered, the next step is jury selection

• Both attorneys, similar to a civil suit trial, will go through potential jurors and attempt to obtain the most favorable jury possible

• Once jury selection is complete the actual trial begins

• First both sides make opening statements

• Then the state makes its case (usually the prosecutor)

  • Will use physical evidence and witnesses who can be cross examined by the defense team

  • Defendants can take the stand but cannot be required to whereas anyone else can be subpoenaed similar to a civil trial

• Then the defense will make its case 

  • Will possibly also use physical evidence and witnesses who may be cross examined by the prosecutor

• Finally both sides will make a summation or closing arguments

• Once both sides have closed their arguments the judge will instruct the jury who will then recess to deliberate and make their verdict

• For a guilty verdict in a criminal trial all 12 jurors must agree that the accused is guilty “beyond all reasonable doubt”

• This, along with other requirements such as the defense being entitled to all prosecuting evidence ahead of time but not vice versa, is to ensure that it is unlikely that an innocent person is convicted

• Alternatively all jurors must agree to acquit the accused

  • This is not the same as saying they are innocent, it is simply saying there is “reasonable doubt” that they are guilty

• If not all 12 jurors agree then it is a hung jury which may result in a mistrial or retrial

• If the jury gives a guilty verdict then sentencing begins

• In some cases the jury is asked to recommend the punishment, in others the judge makes the decision on their own, in others a separate hearing is held to determine the sentence

• Both sides can appeal the decision if it doesn’t go their way, theoretically all the way to SCOTUS

the framers opinions on the bill of rights

• the Framers compromised with their opponents by agreeing to add a Bill of Rights to the document during the first session of Congress

  • The Federalists had originally argued that creating a bill of rights was unneeded because the Constitution as written had narrow guidelines for the what the government could do

    • If it didn’t say it, the government couldn’t do it

      • They worried that creating a Bill of Rights would get it flipped, that the government would see such a document as the list of things it couldn’t do

BOR 1A

• “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

  • Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of peaceable assembly, freedom to petition the government

BOR 2A

• “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

  • Right to keep and bear arms (weapons)B

BOR 3A

• “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

BOR 4A

• “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

  • Protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, guidelines for warrants. Due Process

BOR 5A

• “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

  • Grand Jury Indictment, No Double Jeopardy, Right to not self-incriminate, Private property protections, Due Process

BOR 6A

• “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

  • Speedy and public trial, jury requirements, informed of the charges, confront witnesses, subpoena process, right to an attorney

BOR 7A

• “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”

BOR 8A

•  “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

  • Freedom from excessive bail or fines. No cruel and unusual punishments

BOR 9A

• “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

  • Just because it’s not in here doesn’t mean it isn’t a right of the people

BOR 10A

• “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

  • Any powers that the Constitution doesn’t give to the Federal Government or prohibit to the States belong to the people or to the States

Amendment 13A Section 1

• Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Amendment 13A Section 2

• Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

  • Slavery is illegal in the US unless it’s punishment for a crime. Congress can enforce this with appropriate legislation

amendment 14A section 1

• “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

  • Established that former slaves were now citizens. Selective Incorporation over the states

Amendment 14A Section 2

• “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.”

  • If you’re a citizen eligible to vote and you’re denied the right to vote, your state’s representation in Congress decreases.

amendment 14A section 3

• “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

  • Anyone who had served in the Confederate Military or Government could not be elected to or hold any political or military position in the US unless 2/3 of Congress removed the restriction

Amendment 14A Section 4

• “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.”

  • US Government didn’t assume any debts of the South but all debts incurred by the South were illegal and void

amendment 14A section 5

“The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

• Congress could enforce the 14^th Amendment with appropriate legislation

Amendment 15 A section 1

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude–

Amendment 15A section 2

• The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

  • Can’t be denied the right to vote based on race, color, or if you used to be a slave and Congress can enforce this with appropriate legislation

Amendment 19A

• “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

  • Women could now vote

Amendment 24A section 1

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

amendment 24A section 1

• Section 2 The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

  • Eliminated the poll tax. Cannot be denied the right to vote based on failure to pay taxes

amendment 26A section 1

The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

amendment 26A section 2

•  The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

  • Lowered the voting age to 18

amendment process

• There is a constitutional method to change or amend the Constitution

  • Described in Article V of the Constitution

    • Proposed by either a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress or by 2/3 of the state legislatures

    • Then ratified by ¾ of the state legislatures or by ¾ of state conventions called for the purpose

  • Last amendment – 27^th Amendment

    • Concerns Congressional pay

      • Ratified in 1992

politicization of the courts

• In the last 15 or so years views on the courts, SCOTUS in particular but all courts in general, have become increasingly partisan

  • Each side complaining when decisions don’t go their way

    • Conservatives have accused judges of being “activist” or “legislating from the bench”

      • Generally speaking conservatives believe that the courts should interpret the Constitution/laws as written and as they were intended to be understood by the writers/framers

    • Liberals have accused judges of being “undemocratic”, corrupt, or “authoritarian” because they are mostly unelected and serve in their roles for life

      • Generally speaking liberals believe that courts should see the Constitution as a “living document”. This means that they believe it needs to be interpreted in light of a changing world and society and the courts need to be able to change them via interpretation

  • In the last 10 years in particular this has led to increasing controversy and even violence around SCOTUS picks as judges and their families have been threatened and people have suggested changing the fundamental nature of the court via term limits or “court packing” (increasing the number of justices)

Brown v board of education

• Relates to segregation in public schools

• Brown argued that segregation violated the equal protection clause

• The lower courts denied bc of Plessy v. Ferguson 

  • Which is the separate but equal (even though they were not equal which was being argued)

• Question: Does segregation violate the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment?

  • 9-0 Brown

  • The system is inherently unequal which violated the equal protection clause

  • Supreme Court reasoning was based on logic v precedents 

• Outcome: 

  • Overturned Plessy v. Ferguson

  • Sparked civil rights movements

• US Portion: 14th amendment of us constitution: equal protection

• Other cases: Used as precedent in

  • meredith v fair 

  • alexander v holmes county board of education

schenck v us

• Ww1 charles Schenck is convincing people to go against the draft and is arrested under espionage act

• Question:  The Supreme Court was asked to determine whether Charles Schenck's conviction under the Espionage Act of 1917, for distributing anti-draft leaflets, violated his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. 

• Schenck argued that the espionage act violates the freedom of speech

• 1st Amendment: right to free speech

• Impact: “freedom of speech causes imminent lawless action” then it can be restricted 

• Outcome: The Court ruled that freedom of speech and freedom of the press under the First Amendment could be limited only if the words in the circumstances created "a clear and present danger.”

  • Unanimous 9-0 for US

• Other cases:

  • Dennis v us

    • Gitlow v ny

engel v vitale

• New York state authorized a short voluntary prayer at the start of the school 

• A group of parents, including Steven Engel, challenged this policy, arguing that it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from establishing a religion

• Question: Did the state of New York's policy of having a voluntary prayer recited at the beginning of each school day in public schools violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?

• Decision: The Supreme Court agreed with the parents, ruling that the state-sponsored prayer violated the Establishment Clause

  • 6-1 Engel

• Constitution: First amendment: establishment clause

• Precedents have to do with separation of church and state 

• Impact: The decision expanded the interpretation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from establishing an official religion or unduly favoring one religion over another. 

• Other Cases: 

Abington School District v. Schempp (1963)

wallace v jaffree

lee v weisman

Santa Fe independent school district v doe

TikTok v garland

• US government sued Tiktok over the issue of national security and data security under the idea that the chinese gov was stealing info 

• Basically, the US doesn't have enough evidence to prove they are stealing our data so they got an extension to find evidence

• Question: The question before the Court is whether the Act violates the First Amend- ment as applied to petitioners

• US Constitution/Bill of Rights:

  • First Amendment (Free Speech Clause): TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, argued that the law, which effectively bans TikTok's operation in the US unless it's sold to non-Chinese owners, infringes on their ability to publish others' speech and violates the rights of TikTok and its users to share their own speech. 

  • Article One, Section Nine (Bill of Attainder Clause): The petitioners also argued that the law violated the Bill of Attainder Clause, which prohibits Congress from passing laws that punish an individual or group without a trial. 

  • Fifth Amendment (Takings Clause and Due Process Clause): TikTok raised challenges under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, which prevents the government from taking private property for public use without just compensation, and the Due Process Clause, which ensures that the government acts fairly and justly. 

• Outcome: The Supreme Court in TikTok v. Garland (2025) upheld a law banning the social media's operation in the United States unless it was sold to non-Chinese owners. The Court rejected TikTok's argument that the law violated First Amendment right by limiting free speech. 

  • In a per curiam (unsigned) opinion, the Court held that the challenged provisions of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act do not violate TikTok’s First Amendment rights.

  • Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act: regulates foreign adversary controlled applications

• Court ruled in favor of Garland

Impact: Significant because it highlighted national security concerns and freedom of speech that many Americans are still concerned about.

Gideon v wainwright

• Facts: 

  • Clarence Earl Gideon, a Florida resident, was charged with breaking and entering a pool hall and was unable to afford a lawyer.

  • He asked the state to appoint him a lawyer, but the state denied him because they can only appoint a lawyer in capital cases

  • He ended up representing himself and was found guilty and spent 5 years in prison

  • He filed for this case to go to the Florida supreme court arguing that he was denied counsel, but they favored against him

  • He then took the case to the US supreme court and the decision was unanimous for Gideon. 

    • 9-0 Gideon

• Question: Does the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel in criminal cases extend to felony defendants in state courts?

• Outcome: Unanimous 9-0 siding with Gideon. The Supreme Court argued that the right to have representation was a fundamental right as in the 6th amendment due to the 14th amendment. 

• Impact: Gideon v. Wainwright significantly expanded the rights of criminal defendants in state courts and ensured that all individuals, regardless of their financial status, have the right to legal representation in serious criminal cases

• US Constitution/Bill of Rights: 

  • 14th amendment

  • 6th amendment

• Other Cases:

  • Overturned: Betts v. Brady

tinker v des moines

• Facts:

  • There was a group of students in a Des Moines school that wore an armband to school in support of a truce in the vietnam war. The students were planning on doing this until New Years. The school found out and made an announcement that if the students came to school with an armband on they would be asked to remove them or be sent home. Some students did get sent home and did not come back until after new years. 

  • John Tinker was one of those students and his parents sued the school under the argument that it disregarded their right of expression. The district court favored the school saying that it was in their rights of discipline. The case got appealed to the Supreme Court. 

• Question: Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students' freedom of speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment?

• Outcome: 

  • In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that school officials cannot censor student speech unless it substantially disrupts the educational process.

  • The court ruled that students do not lose their constitutional rights to free speech or expression at school.

• Impact:

  • The Tinker v. Des Moines decision is still cited in student free speech cases. It establishes a precedent that continues to shape legal battles today.

• US Constitution/Bill of Rights:

  • First Amendment

• Other Cases:

Bethel School District v. Fraser

morse v frederick

mahanoy area school district B.L.

hazelewood school district v kuvlmeier

Wisconsin v yoder

• Facts:

  • Jonas Yoder, Wallace Miller, and Adin Yutzy refused to send their children to school after 8th grade because it was against their religion (Amish). They were prosecuted by the state because it was required for children to attend school until 16 years of age.

• Question: Did Wisconsin's requirement that all parents send their children to school at least until age 16 violate the First Amendment by criminalizing the conduct of parents who refused to send their children to school for religious reasons?

• Outcome:

  • The Supreme Court, in a 6-to-1 decision, sided with the Amish parents, holding that the state's interest in compelling school attendance beyond the eighth grade did not outweigh the parents' fundamental right to free exercise of religion.

• Impact:

  • The case has been cited as a basis for parents' rights to educate their children outside of traditional public or private schools, and it continues to be a landmark case in the area of religious freedom and education

• US Constitution/Bill of Rights:

  • 14th amendment

  • 1st amendment: freedom of religion

• Other Cases:

Pierce v. Society of Sisters

Kennedy v. bremerton school district

Carson v makin

Fulton v philadelphia

US v lopez

• Facts:

  • Alfonzo Lopez (12th grader) brought a concealed weapon to school. Texas charged him with wrongful possession on campus. He was found guilty and sent to prison. 

• Question: Is the 1990 Gun-Free School Zones Act, forbidding individuals from knowingly carrying a gun in a school zone, unconstitutional because it exceeds the power of Congress to legislate under the Commerce Clause?

• Outcome:

  • In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Gun-Free School Zones Act was unconstitutional, holding that the possession of a gun in a local school zone was not an economic activity that could substantially affect interstate commerce

• Impact:

  • United States v. Lopez was a landmark decision that marked a shift in the balance of power between the federal government and the states. It was the first time in nearly 60 years that the Supreme Court had found that Congress had exceeded its power under the Commerce Clause

• US Constitution/Bill of Rights:

  •  Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3)

• Other Cases:

  • US v. Morrison

    • NFIB v Sibelius

Hobbs v jackson

• Facts:

  • Centered on a Mississippi law that banned abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of medical emergency or severe fetal abnormality. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in Mississippi had a doctor that filed a suit against the federal district requesting an emergency temporary restraining order for summary judgement. The district court sided with Jackson  

• Question: Is Mississippi’s law banning nearly all abortions after 15 weeks’ gestational age unconstitutional?

• Outcome:

  • In June 2022, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mississippi, overturning Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which had established a constitutional right to abortion

• Impact:

  • The ruling has led to significant changes in abortion access across the country, with some states enacting bans or severe restrictions, while others have sought to protect abortion rights.

• US Constitution/Bill of Rights:

  • 14th amendment: due process clause

• Other Cases:

  • Overruling of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey

• meredith v fair

In Meredith v. Fair, James Meredith, a Black student, challenged the University of Mississippi's denial of his admission, arguing it was based on race, a claim upheld by the Supreme Court, paving the way for his integration into the university

Dennis v us

In Dennis v. United States (1951), the Supreme Court upheld the convictions of Communist Party leaders under the Smith Act,finding that advocating for the violent overthrow of the government constituted a "clear and present danger" and was therefore a legitimate restriction on free speech

Abington School District v. Schempp (1963):

• This case, decided a year after Engel, further solidified the precedent by finding that mandatory Bible reading and prayer in public schools were unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause.

Betts v. Brady (1942

was overturned by Gideon v wainwright; This case held that the right to counsel was not a fundamental right in state court cases, and the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause did not require states to provide counsel to indigent defendants in all criminal cases. 

Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986):

• Clarified that students do not have the right to make obscene or vulgar speech at school. 

pierce v society of sisters

•  This case argued that the "liberty" of the Fourteenth Amendment granted parents the right to choose whether to enroll their children in public school, private school, or homeschool, and that children could not be forced to attend public education. 

us v morrison

• This case, like Lopez, focused on the Commerce Clause, and the Court ruled that the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which allowed civil lawsuits for gender-based violence, was unconstitutional because Congress lacked the power to regulate non-economic, local violence. 

roe v wade, and planned parenthood v casey

was overruled by Hobbs v Jackson; The core impact of Dobbs is that it overturned the precedent set by Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which established a constitutional right to abortion.

Facts

• In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms, as recognized in District of Columbia v. Heller, is applicable to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment, overturning Chicago and Oak Park's gun bans

• Question before the court: Does the Second Amendment apply to the states because it is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges and Immunities or Due Process clauses and thereby made applicable to the states?

• Holding/decision

  • In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision was built upon District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), which affirmed an individual’s right to own a firearm for self-defense but only applied to federal jurisdictions like Washington, D.C.

• Impact of the Case:

  • It reinforced that the right to bear arms is a fundamental right that states and local governments cannot unduly restrict.

  • It led to challenges against various state and local gun control laws.

  • It significantly influenced gun rights debates in the U.S.

• Applicable portion of the constitution

  • The Second Amendment – This amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court ruled that this right applies to state and local governments, not just the federal government.

  • The Fourteenth Amendment (Due Process Clause) – The Court used the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to "incorporate" the Second Amendment, meaning that states and cities cannot infringe upon the fundamental right to bear arms.

• Other court cases 

  • New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022)

New York State rifle and pistol association v bruen

• This case expanded on McDonald and District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) by ruling that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to carry a firearm outside the home for self-defense.

• The Court struck down New York's restrictive concealed carry law, which required applicants to show "proper cause" to obtain a permit.

• The decision reaffirmed that gun rights are fundamental and should not be subject to excessive government discretion.

summary of a letter from a Birmingham jail

• Response to Criticism:

  King wrote the letter in response to criticism from eight white clergymen who called his protests "unwise and untimely". 

• Just vs. Unjust Laws:

  King distinguishes between just and unjust laws, arguing that individuals have a duty to obey just laws and a right to disobey unjust ones. 

• Nonviolent Direct Action:

  He explains the principles of nonviolent direct action, arguing that it is a necessary tool to create the tension needed to force negotiationand change. 

• Urgency of Justice:

  King emphasizes the need for immediate action against injustice, arguing that African Americans have waited long enough for their rights. 

• Four Steps of Nonviolent Campaign:

  King outlines the four steps of a nonviolent campaign: collection of facts, negotiation, self-purification, and direct action. 

• "Outsider" Accusation:

  King addresses the accusation that he is an "outsider" by arguing that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere". 

• Critique of Moderates:

  King criticizes white moderates for being more committed to order than to justice, arguing that they often counsel patience instead of action. 

• Legacy:

  "Letter from Birmingham Jail" is a powerful and influential document of the Civil Rights Movement, demonstrating King's courage, passion, and brilliance in the fight for justice and equality.