Landmark Supreme Court Cases
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
The last night of John Adams being president, he tried to appoint several Federalists as judges. Thomas Jefferson, Adam's vice president and the one who would come into power the next day, told his secretary of state James Madison to not deliver them and therefore deny the judges.
William Marbury, one of the to-be judges, took to SCOTUS to ask that Madison be ordered to deliver the papers.
While SCOTUS had the authority to do so (Judiciary Act), but the Constitution didn’t give the Court the power to do so
Chief Justice John Marshall decided that the Judiciary Act was unconstitutional, and that SCOTUS didn’t have the power to make Jefferson administration do anything.
Marbury v. Madison: (1803) Established judicial review
Marbury v. Madison CJCS: Marshall
Fletcher v. Peck (1810)
Georgia violated Constitution by not honoring a contract.
Fletcher v. Peck: (1810) Court could declare state laws unconstitutional
Fletcher v. Peck CJCS: Marshall
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
In 1816 Congress established Bank of the U.S, which had the job of controlling state banks. Anti-central government were opposed, and state of Maryland imposed $50,000 tax on the Baltimore branch of the bank to try to run it out of business. Cashier, James McCulloch, refused to pay and Maryland brought case to SCOTUS.
SCOTUS had to decide whether or not:
- Congress could charter a bank?
- Does U.S. Const. allow for state to tax federal agency?
- Does federal government or do states have sovereignty?
Court favored the federal strength of the U.S - Though the U.S. Const. did not grant specific right to charter a bank, this fell under elastic clause. State couldn’t tax bank because the state could just theoretically tax the bank out of existence. And federal government ruled above states because it was created by the people, not the states.
McCulloch v. Maryland: (1819) Federal Govt. could set up a bank, and states could not tax Federal Govt.
McCulloch v. Maryland CJSC: John Marshall
Cohens v. Virginia (1821)
Marbury v. Madison didn’t establish whether SCOTUS could review state court decisions.
Congress passed a law that would set up a lottery in D.C. to help pay for a new Capitol building. Cohen brothers were arrested in Virginia for selling tickets for the new lottery, as a VA law prohibited sale of non-VA lottery tickets.
The Cohens said that their actions were protected by federal law. When taken to a VA court, the judge fined and convicted the brothers. VA court said that the case could not go to SCOTUS because the actions were criminal under state law.
SCOTUS argued that it had the power to review state criminal proceedings, because if not then the state courts held power over federal courts.
Cohens v. Virginia: (1821) State courts are subject to review by SCOTUS.
Cohens v. Virginia CJSC: John Marshall.
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
Ogden purchased the right to run steamboats on Hudson River (btw. NJ & NY) from the inventor of the steamboat (Robert Fulton), who had gotten HIS rights from NY State.
At the same time, Congress gave Thomas Gibbons license to transport passengers between NY and NJ.
Ogden felt his exclusive rights were violated, sued Gibbons in NY courts, and won. Gibbons, however, appealed to SCOTUS because the dispute fell into interstate commerce and only Congress could regulate that.
SCOTUS ruled in favor of Gibbons.
Gibbons v. Ogden: (1824) Congress regulated anything that fell under “commerce”, specifically interstate.
Gibbons v. Ogden CJSC: John Marshall
Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)
Dred Scott was a slave of John Emerson in Missouri. Scott lived with Emerson in two places where slavery was forbidden. Emerson died when they returned to Missouri.
In 1846, Scott sued Emerson’s wife for his freedom, with the argument that living in free land made him free.
SCOTUS ruled that Scott couldn’t bring a suit to federal court because blacks were not considered U.S. citizens, and only the latter could bring matters to federal court.
SCOTUS also ruled that it could not interfere with property (slaves and blacks considered property) and could therefore not prohibit slavery in any territory.
Basically made Missouri Compromise useless, and any future designation of land as free and slave was unconstitutional.
Dred Scott v. Sanford: (1857) Blacks could not become U.S. citizens, and Congress could not prohibit slavery in federal territory. Nullified Missouri Compromise
Dred Scott v. Sanford CJSC: Roger B. Taney
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
Homer Plessy, a White-looking man who was actually 1/8th black (ONE of his great-grandparents was black) sat in a railway car reserved for white people, breaking a Louisiana law.
SCOTUS ruled against him, saying that
Started the ‘separate but equal’ rule and strengthened segregation.
Plessy v. Ferguson: (1896) Segregation in public was legal as long as the separate facilities were equal.
Plessy v. Ferguson CJSC: Melville Fuller
Bram v. United States (1897)
Aboard the American ship the Herbert Fuller, the captain, his wife, and first officer were found murdered. The crew believed it to be Brown and shackled him, while Brown claimed that he witnessed second officer Bram commit the murders.
The ship stopped at Halifax, where a detective interrogated Bram and forced a confession out of him. The latter was then sent to U.S. authority. Bram claimed that his confession was not free and voluntary, and that his Fifth Amendment rights had been violated.
SCOTUS ruled in Bram’s favor, and said that the use of involuntary confessions in federal courts was prohibited. In 1964 this rule applied to the states.
Bram v. United States: (1897) Use of involuntary confession invalid in court.
Bram v. United States CJSC: Melville Fuller
Schenk v. United States (1919)
During World War I, the Espionage Act (1917) made it illegal to interfere with the war effort, including the draft. Charles Schenk opposed the draft, and mailed pamphlets to thousands of young men, urging them to oppose the draft.
District Court convicted him of violated the Espionage Act, while he appealed on the grounds that he was expressing his First Amendment rights.
SCOTUS ruled against him, stating that free speech could be restricted during wartime on the grounds that a nation has the right to protect itself.
Schenk v. United States: (1919) Established clear-and-present-danger principle, allowing free speech to be restricted in certain conditions.
Schenk v. United States CJSC: Edward D. White (Notable justice Oliver Wendell Holmes)
Gitlow v. New York (1925)
Benjamin Gitlow, a member of the Socialist party, was arrested and charged with criminal anarchy in 1919 for publishing The Left Wing Manifesto, which called for socialism in America. Gitlow argued that his First Amendment rights were violated.
He was represented by the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), but in a 7-2 decision, SCOTUS ruled that a state may forbid speech that places public security in jeopardy. SCOTUS ruled that the First Amendment applied to the states, something which had not happened up until that point.
Gitlow v. New York: (1925) State may forbid free speech that endangers public safety, First Amendment applied to the states.
Gitlow v. New York CJSC: William Howard Taft (Holmes voted FOR Gitlow)
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
A black family (the Browns) living in Topeka wanted their daughter Linda to attend a school just a few blocks away from their home. However, school officials informed them that Linda would have to go to a Black-only school 21 blocks away.
The Brown family was represented by Thurgood Marshall, a lawyer of the NAACP, argued that segregation in schools directly violated the 14th Amendment, and that separate facilities of education were inherently unequal.
SCOTUS was at a standstill, and in one of the pauses Chief Justice Vinson died and was replaced by Earl Warren, who was strongly opposed to segregation. Warren felt that unless the Court ruled unanimously in favor of Brown, the South would still try to continue the segregation.
Warren wrote and rewrote the court ruling, basing his argument on the danger segregation had on society and public education as a whole. Eventually, the Court ruled 9-0 in Brown’s favor, partly overturning Plessy v. Ferguson and was extremely important in its role in the Civil Rights Movement.
Brown v. Board of Education: (1954) Separation of races in schools was inherently against 14th amendment, partly overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, kickstarted legislation part of Civil Rights Movement.
Brown v. Baord of Education CJSC: Vinson then Warren
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Clarence Gideon was convicted of robbing a Florida pool hall. Since he was poor and couldn’t afford an attorney, he requested that one be provided for him. His request was denied, and he was sent to jail where he read up on law and eventually appealed to SCOTUS.
In a unanimous decision, SCOTUS overturned his conviction. He was later retried and acquitted.
Gideon v. Wainwright: (1963) Defendants have the right to be represented in court, and should they not be able to provide counsel, one should be provided for them by the state.
Gideon v. Wainwright CJSC: Earl Warren
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
In March of 1963, circumstantial evidence led the arrest of Ernesto Miranda by the Phoenix PD for the kidnapping and rape of an 18-year-old girl. He was not informed of his right to counsel.
In a suspect lineup, the victim identified him as her attacker, and he wrote a confession to the crime after police told him he’d been identified.
Miranda’s lawyer argued that his confession could not be used in court as it was involuntary. Miranda was still convicted, but his lawyers appealed.
SCOTUS voted (5-4) that 5th Amendment protections against self-incrimination extend to police questioning. Police had to inform suspects of their constitutional rights, later known as Miranda rights: to remain silent, anything they say can be used against them, they have right to counsel.
Miranda was retried and found guilty.
Miranda v. Arizona: (1966) Set strict guidelines for police questioning, importantly that suspects be made aware of their constitutional rights.
Miranda v. Arizona CJSC: Earl Warren
In re Gault (1967)
State of Arizona denied due process to Gerald Gault, a 15-year-old.
In re Gault: (1967) Juveniles were ruled to be entitled to due process, same as adults.
In re Gault CJSC: Earl Warren
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) became pregnant with her third child. She wanted an abortion, but lived in Texas, where the medical procedure was illegal. Her lawyers filed a lawsuit against local district attorney Henry Wade on basis that Texas abortion lawyers were unconstitutional.
SCOTUS ruled 7-2 in favor of McCorvey, based on due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment.
Roe v. Wade: (1973) Abortion was protected at the federal level.
Roe v. Wade CJSC: Warren Burger
United States v. Nixon (1974)
Ordered President Richard Nixon to deliver tape recordings and other subpoenaed materials relating to Watergate