Important Supreme Court Cases. Marbury v. Madison (1803) John Marshall used the case to establish Judicial Review which allows the court to declare.

Important Supreme Important Supreme Court CasesCourt Cases

Marbury v. Madison (1803)Marbury v. Madison (1803)

John Marshall used the case to establish John Marshall used the case to establish Judicial ReviewJudicial Review which allows the court which allows the court to declare a law unconstitutionalto declare a law unconstitutional

Most Important court caseMost Important court case Judicial review is not found in the Judicial review is not found in the

ConstitutionConstitution Made the Judicial Branch an equal with Made the Judicial Branch an equal with

the Legislative and Executive Branchesthe Legislative and Executive Branches

N.J. v. T.L.O. (1985)N.J. v. T.L.O. (1985)

Dealt with student searches in Dealt with student searches in schoolsschools

Ruled that schools do not have to Ruled that schools do not have to meet the same requirements as the meet the same requirements as the police when searching a studentpolice when searching a student

Must only pass a reasonableness Must only pass a reasonableness test, not have probable causetest, not have probable cause

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

Case that started when students Case that started when students wearing black arm bands to protest wearing black arm bands to protest Vietnam War were suspended from Vietnam War were suspended from schoolschool

Courts said that students still have Courts said that students still have freedom of speech in schools as long freedom of speech in schools as long as they do not disrupt the learning as they do not disrupt the learning environmentenvironment

Roe v. Wade (1973)Roe v. Wade (1973)

Dealt with abortionDealt with abortion Court based decision on current Court based decision on current

medical knowledge, not religious medical knowledge, not religious beliefsbeliefs

Allowed abortions in first 3 months of Allowed abortions in first 3 months of pregnancy, banned them in the last 3 pregnancy, banned them in the last 3 months, and left the middle three months, and left the middle three months up to the statesmonths up to the states

Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)

A slave named Dred Scott sued to the A slave named Dred Scott sued to the Supreme Court for his freedom since his Supreme Court for his freedom since his master took him into a free statemaster took him into a free state

Court said that he could not sue for his Court said that he could not sue for his freedom as he was not a U. S. citizen freedom as he was not a U. S. citizen

Court went on to say that no state could Court went on to say that no state could ban slavery as it was part of the ban slavery as it was part of the Constitution (3/5ths Compromise)Constitution (3/5ths Compromise)

This was one of the causes of the Civil WarThis was one of the causes of the Civil War

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Dealt with a challenge to a Louisiana Dealt with a challenge to a Louisiana law that segregated races on law that segregated races on railroadsrailroads

Court said that segregation does not Court said that segregation does not imply racial inferiorityimply racial inferiority

Said that racial segregation was legalSaid that racial segregation was legal

Brown v. Board of Education of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954)Topeka, Kansas (1954)

Again addressed the issues of racial Again addressed the issues of racial segregation, this time in public segregation, this time in public schoolsschools

Said that racial segregation implies Said that racial segregation implies that one race is superior to anotherthat one race is superior to another

Said that racial segregation was Said that racial segregation was illegal, reversing the Plessy caseillegal, reversing the Plessy case

Korematsu V. USA (1944)Korematsu V. USA (1944)

After Pearl Harbor, US agents placed After Pearl Harbor, US agents placed Japanese American in intern camps, Japanese American in intern camps, Korematsu refused to go.Korematsu refused to go.

Court ruled that in war time, Court ruled that in war time, President has the power to do what President has the power to do what they feel is necessary to protect the they feel is necessary to protect the whole nation, thus the camps were whole nation, thus the camps were legal.legal.

Also said that living in the camps was Also said that living in the camps was a civic responsibilitya civic responsibility

Engle v. Vitale (1962)Engle v. Vitale (1962)

New York tried to install a New York tried to install a nondenominational, noncompulsory nondenominational, noncompulsory prayer in schoolsprayer in schools

Court ruled that any prayer said in Court ruled that any prayer said in school was in essence the school school was in essence the school promoting religion, which violated promoting religion, which violated the separation of church and Statethe separation of church and State

Hazelwood School District v. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)Kuhlmeier (1988)

A principal of a High School banned A principal of a High School banned several articles from the school several articles from the school newspaper, the students sued saying that newspaper, the students sued saying that they had free speechthey had free speech

Court said that the school paper was an Court said that the school paper was an educational tool and therefore could be educational tool and therefore could be censoredcensored

Also said that since the paper was not a Also said that since the paper was not a public forum, the government did not have public forum, the government did not have to protect the students free speechto protect the students free speech

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Clarence Gideon was a small time thief Clarence Gideon was a small time thief that could not afford a lawyer and had to that could not afford a lawyer and had to defend himself in court. He lost.defend himself in court. He lost.

Sued to have his conviction overturned Sued to have his conviction overturned since he was denied a lawyersince he was denied a lawyer

Court agreed with Gideon, saying that all Court agreed with Gideon, saying that all people are entitled to a lawyer no matter people are entitled to a lawyer no matter how small the case, because the common how small the case, because the common man does not have the skills necessary to man does not have the skills necessary to defend themselves in courtdefend themselves in court

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

Was arrested and convicted of rape, Was arrested and convicted of rape, thought conviction should be thought conviction should be overturned as he did not have his overturned as he did not have his rights read to himrights read to him

Court ruled that a person must have Court ruled that a person must have their rights read to them at the time their rights read to them at the time of the arrest and that once those of the arrest and that once those rights are read, any confession is rights are read, any confession is admissible in court.admissible in court.

Escebo v. Illinois (1964)Escebo v. Illinois (1964)

Asked at what time does a suspect Asked at what time does a suspect have a right to an attorneyhave a right to an attorney

Court ruled that once an Court ruled that once an interrogation changes from a fact interrogation changes from a fact finding session, to an actual finding session, to an actual accusation, a lawyer must be present accusation, a lawyer must be present to prevent forced confessionsto prevent forced confessions

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

Asked if any evidence that is Asked if any evidence that is gathered illegally may be used in gathered illegally may be used in courtcourt

Court ruled that no illegally gathered Court ruled that no illegally gathered evidence may ever be used in a trialevidence may ever be used in a trial

This applies to both the state and This applies to both the state and national levelsnational levels

United States v. Nixon (1974)United States v. Nixon (1974)

President Nixon refused to turn over President Nixon refused to turn over tapes in a criminal investigation tapes in a criminal investigation claiming executive privilegeclaiming executive privilege

Court said that a President can’t use Court said that a President can’t use executive privilege to avoid criminal executive privilege to avoid criminal chargescharges

Nixon turned over the tapes and Nixon turned over the tapes and resigned 4 days laterresigned 4 days later

Regents of the University of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978California v. Bakke (1978))

Case challenged affirmative action Case challenged affirmative action programs saying that they caused programs saying that they caused reverse discriminationreverse discrimination

Court agreed with Bakke, however Court agreed with Bakke, however they went on to say that as long as they went on to say that as long as race is not the only factor in race is not the only factor in determining jobs or admissions, then determining jobs or admissions, then affirmative action programs were affirmative action programs were legallegal

Furman v. Georgia (1972)Furman v. Georgia (1972)

Court ruled that the death penalty Court ruled that the death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment was cruel and unusual punishment and all executions were stoppedand all executions were stopped

Forced states to rewrite their laws to Forced states to rewrite their laws to give jurors more guidance and to give jurors more guidance and to force state to try to apply the laws force state to try to apply the laws more fairly to all races and social more fairly to all races and social classesclasses

Reynolds v. Simms (1964)Reynolds v. Simms (1964)

Dealt with the question of whether or Dealt with the question of whether or not congressional districts should be not congressional districts should be based on land size or populationbased on land size or population

Stated that all congressional districts Stated that all congressional districts must be drawn based on population must be drawn based on population not land size. Created the principle of not land size. Created the principle of “one man one vote”“one man one vote”

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Schools (1971)Schools (1971)

Was a response to North Carolina’s Was a response to North Carolina’s slow reaction to desegregation its slow reaction to desegregation its schools after the schools after the Brown v. Board of Brown v. Board of EducationEducation case case

Forced school districts to use busing Forced school districts to use busing to integrate all schoolsto integrate all schools

Texas V. Johnson (1989)Texas V. Johnson (1989)

Was asking the question if whether Was asking the question if whether burning an American flag was burning an American flag was unpatriotic or if it was a protected unpatriotic or if it was a protected form of free speechform of free speech

Said the burning an American flag as Said the burning an American flag as a political protest was a protected a political protest was a protected form of free speechform of free speech

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

Started when Maryland tried to tax a Started when Maryland tried to tax a federal bankfederal bank

Upheld the supremacy clause of the Upheld the supremacy clause of the Constitution and the Maryland law Constitution and the Maryland law was thrown outwas thrown out

Dartmouth College v. Woodward Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819)(1819)

Allowed the corporation form of Allowed the corporation form of government to exist which allowed government to exist which allowed for the growth of the American for the growth of the American economyeconomy

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

Was a question of the power of the Was a question of the power of the federal government to regulate federal government to regulate interstate commerceinterstate commerce

Expanded the definition of commerce Expanded the definition of commerce which allowed for rapid growth of the which allowed for rapid growth of the economyeconomy

Bush v. Gore (2000)Bush v. Gore (2000)

George Bush sued to the Supreme Court to George Bush sued to the Supreme Court to stop the recount of votes in Florida during stop the recount of votes in Florida during the 2000 Presidential electionthe 2000 Presidential election

Said that it violated the 14th Amendment Said that it violated the 14th Amendment rights rights

Court ruled that since there was no Court ruled that since there was no uniform way to judge the validity of the uniform way to judge the validity of the ballots, the recount had to stopballots, the recount had to stop

This gave the Presidency to George Bush This gave the Presidency to George Bush over Al Goreover Al Gore

State v. Leandro (1994)State v. Leandro (1994)

Parents from 5 counties in North Parents from 5 counties in North Carolina sued the state saying that it Carolina sued the state saying that it did not provide enough money to did not provide enough money to give the students a “sound give the students a “sound education”education”

Court ruled that the state Court ruled that the state constitution does not require equal constitution does not require equal funding for educationfunding for education

Hoke v. State (2004)Hoke v. State (2004)

A follow up case to State v. LeandroA follow up case to State v. Leandro This time the court ruled that “At risk This time the court ruled that “At risk

children require more resources and children require more resources and focused attention to learnfocused attention to learn

This forced the state to create new This forced the state to create new more equal funding programsmore equal funding programs