FIRST AMENDMENT:
Engel v. Vitale
Ruled it unconstitutional for public schools to have school prayers as a whole
This case was about a prayer said on the PUBLICLY-owned announcement system
Used Establishment Clause for defense
1st Amendment
Government cannot establish its own religion
Big Question: Does school-sponsored NON-DENOMINAL prayers violate the Establishment Clause?
Significance: Increased separation of church and state within education fields
Wisconsin v. Yoder
Ruled it unconstitutional for the government to force amish children to go to school past 8th grade
Used Free Exercise clause for defense
1st Amendment
Ppl. can exercise whatever religions they want as long as it does not interfere with government interests
Big Question: Did Wisconsin’s requirement that all parents must send their children to school until they turn 16 violate parents’ First Amendment rights by criminalizing parents who refused to send their children to school due to RELIGIOUS reasons?
Significance: Increased freedom for amish families, yet also caused controversy as it raises questions about the limits of religious practices in relation to state laws, particularly regarding education and child labor
Tinker v. Des Moines
Ruled it constitutional for students to express their political beliefs during school AS LONG as it does not threaten others
Context: students wore an armband with peace symbol on it — protesting vietnam war — eventually got called to principal’s office + forced to take it off
Used Freedom of Expression for defense
1st Amendment
Big Question: Do students lose their constitutional rights during school hours?
Significance: Increased freedom for children; allowing them to retain constitutional rights during school hours SPECIFICALLY freedom of expression
Schenck v. United States
Ruled government libel unconstitutional in times of war
Context: Schenck threw pamphlets out of window; pamphlets telling ppl. not to register for draft during WWI
Convicted under Espionage Act
Passed in 1917, shortly after US entered WWI
Crime to convey information intended to interfere with the war effort
Big Question: Did Schenck’s conviction under the Espionage Act violate his 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech?
Significance: Decreased freedom for US citizens; freedom of speech is now not protected if it qualifies as “clear and present danger”
Clear and Present: If someone’s words/actions can cause serious harm, the government can stop them from speaking/acting that way
NYTimes v. United States
Ruled it constitutional for press to publish all and any statements, regardless if it goes against the government
Context: NYTimes published Pentagon Papers exposing US government for lying for the past ~15 years about the Vietnam War
Used 1st Amendment for defense
Specifically freedom of press
Big Question: Did the Nixon administration’s effort to prevent the publication of “classified information” violate the First Amendment?
Significance: Increased freedom for press; allowed them to continue to hold government accountable
SECOND AMENDMENT:
McDonald v. Chicago
Ruled Chicago legislation unconstitutional that restricted the possession of guns
Context: Chicago had strict gun safety measures to help make the city safer; specifically that citizens were unable to purchase a handgun
Used 2nd Amendment for defense
Big Question: Does the Second Amendment apply to the states specifically through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities clause?
Significance: Increased freedom for citizens; selective incorporation; supremacy clause
SIXTH AMENDMENT:
Gideon v. Wainwright
Ruled all states must provide state-appointed attorneys in all criminal cases unless that right is waived
Context: Man was unfairly denied his right to an attorney in a criminal case
Used 6th Amendment for defense
Big Question: Does the right to counsel guaranteed under the 6th Amendment of the Constitution apply to defendants in state court?
Significance: Selective incorporation; increased rights on behalf of citizens
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT:
Brown v. Board of Education
Ruled racial segregation of state-sponsored schools is illegal
Context: Black children were unable to attend white schools; these schools typically had better education conditions
Used Equal Protections Clause for defense
14th Amendment
Big Question: Does segregation of children in public schools solely based of race, even though the physical facilities and other “tangible” factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities?
Significance: Desegregated state-sponsored schools based
First Amendment —> Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom to assemble (protest), right to petition (complain to elected officials + seek to have their issues resolved)
Second Amendment —> Right to bear arms 🤮
Third Amendment —> Right to not be quartered (no soldier shall take over persons house without consent of the owner of persons house)
Rights of the Accused:
Fourth Amendment —> Right to unfair searches/seizures
Fifth Amendment —> Will not be tried twice for a crime they have already been subjected to; refuse to answer questions; due process clause
Sixth amendment —> Right to speedy and public trial; right to fair trial; right to defense attorney in criminal trials
Seventh Amendment —> Right to a jury trial
Eighth Amendment —> Protection against cruel and unusual punishment
Ninth Amendment —> Unimportant basically just says everyone has all rights enumerated by the constitution
Tenth Amendment —> Powers not enumerated to the country are implied by states
Fourteenth Amendment —> Birthright citizenship, due process clause, equal protection clause
Freedom is never voluntarily given; you must demand it
To understand the true mass of segregation you must be affected by it
White people not protesting for Black rights is a bigger injustice than segregation itself
People need to grasp the purpose behind this movement and how it is “necessary” for justice to be achieved
We should follow desegregation in Brown v. BoE for all of society instead of just selectively
Strict scrutiny —> a form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of certain laws
Habeas Corpus —> a person who is arrested must stand trial to be legally imprisoned
Obscenity —> material which deals with sex in a manner appealing to prurient interest
Clear and present danger test —> first the speech must impose a threat that a substantive evil might follow & second the threat is a real, imminent threat.
Lemon test —> The three-part test for Establishment Clause cases that a law must pass before it is declared constitutional: it must have a secular purpose; it must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and it must not cause excessive entanglement with religion.