U.S. Supreme Court Cases

U.S. Supreme Court Cases

• Defining rights in the Bill of Rights

• Issues that challenge our liberty!

Lemon v. Kurtzman

Amendment 1, clause 1About freedom of religion and receiving state aid to fund parochial schools. Tax payers don’t feel their money should go towards religious education.To be constitutional, aid must: (Lemon test)

Secular, nonreligious purposeCan’t help or hurt religionGovernment avoids getting entangled excessively with religion.

Civil rights: the right to a good education including religious beliefs without using the state aid for specific religious activities. State aid is allowed to parochial schools as long as it does not help or hurt religion. They pursue separation of church and state without hindering freedom of religion.

Source: United States Government Textbook, p. 360 & 761

Wisconsin vs. Yoder

Karlye Smith & Laura Savall

•This case is about the suppression of Amish culture by controlling the amount of time spent in school.

•The Yoder family didn’t want to send their children to public school because it could decrease their cultural values. In order to keep their strong beliefs, Amish have set up their own schools.

•According to the laws in 1972, the government required school until 16 years of age, but Amish only require school only through 8th grade.

•The 1st Amendment and the 14th Amendment: freedom to express religion. •This case changed the defines rights on no restrictions or infringements on culture/religion.•Impacts civil rights and justifies the government not to pose on religion.

• A government-directed prayer in public schools violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, even if the prayer is neutral and students may remain silent or be excused from the classroom at the time.

• Impacts the separation of church and state.

• http://www.infoplease.com/us/supreme-court/cases/ar10.html

Schenck v U.S.

• Mailed circulars to draftees that suggested that the draft was monstrous.

• Schenck was charged with conspiracy by violating the Espionage Act by causing an attempt of insubordination in the military and of obstructing recruitment.

• The document was seized under a search warrant and held admissible in evidence with the Fourth and Fifth Amendment.

Bethel v. Fraser

• Matthew Fraser did a speech that had sexual metaphors• Got suspended for 2 days• 1st Amendment- free speech• Free Speech in schools, not public• Court concluded it was appropriate for the school to

prohibit offensive language• Burger, Chief of Justice, said the 1st Amendment didn’t

prohibit the school prohibiting offensive language because it is against school values

• Sources: http:/ www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_1667 and Supreme Court Case Study 55

Texas Vs. Johnson- Sarah James and Alyssa Blackledge

• First Amendment- Freedom of Symbolic Speech, Freedom of Expression

• Gregory Johnson was arrested and put into jail by burning an American flag via Texas law. The Supreme Court said the imprisonment was unconstitutional.

• Current Issue-The right to protest and the right to burn the American flag, even if it is found offensive.

• This case defined the rights of the use of symbolic speech, freedom to protest, and the freedom of expression as protected by the First Amendment.

TINKER V. DES MOINES• A group students wore black

armbands with peace signs in protest to the U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

• Went from the school board eventually to the Supreme Court on Nov. 12, 1968.

• Students fought for their First Amendment rights.

• Supreme Court ruled that the school had violated their right to free expression/symbolic speech by suspending the students.

• School ultimately has censoring ability if the expression is a disruption or invades the rights of the other students.

Source: Excerption from Death by Cheeseburger: High School Journalism in the 1990’s and Beyond by Alice Bonner, et. Al., The Freedom Forum

Hazelwood school district vs. Kuhlmeler, 1988

Student Rights of the First AmendmentFreedom of Speech, Petition, Press, Assemble, Religion

According to the stories given, in 1983, the principal of Hazelwood High objected to keep two pages in SPECTRUM, the student newspaper.

These included a story about pregnancy experiences and parents’ divorce.

The students filed a lawsuit against the principal, and the judge ruled against them in 1985. Then in 1986 the Federal appeals court overturned the ruling, by claiming that the students had the rights to express their thoughts in SPECTRUM, which is part of the First Amendment.A year after, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. As a result, the educators did not offend the First Amendment since the students had limited rights in the newspaper.

In school, there is a limit in which students may express their thoughts so that students and teachers are kept safe from the wrongs.

http://www.nikiomahe.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/hazelwood-school-in-glasgow-uk-by-gmad-1.jpg

http://www.stus.com/images/products/con0063.gif

Schenck V. Pro-Choice Network

• First Amendment- Freedom to assemble, freedom to protest.

• Impact on Civil Rights?

-Case limited the rights to protest on private property. Created a “buffer zone” so that protesters couldn’t get too close to individuals entering abortion clinics and couldn’t block doors.

• Reason for change?

-It was abolishing the rights of individuals whom were entering the clinics. The protestors had the right to be there but the individuals entering did also.

Columbia V. Heller

• This case is between the District of Columbia and a group of private gun owners.

• The issue is that District of Columbia passed legislation barring the registration of handguns, and regulating the guns. a group of private gun-owners brought suit claiming the laws violated their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

• The issue was some people claimed that the law interfered with the freedom of the right to bear arms.

• The trial courts decision was against the gun-owners. It then went to the U.S. Court of Appeals. They reversed the lower courts decision. They said that the 2nd amendment does cover private gun owners too. It then went to the U.S. Supreme court, they upheld the decision of the appellate court.

• Sources: U.S. Supreme Court media “Oyez” http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_07_290

Mapp v. OhioJenae Mattson & Erica Warffuel

The freedoms of the 4th amendment say that a person or a person’s belongings cannot be searched without probable cause and a warrant.(“What Does the Constitution Say?”)

Dollree Mapp’s rights were violated when the police broke into her house, dragged her up the stairs and went through her personal belongings and papers without a warrant. Although she was tried, found guilty, and arrested for her illegal materials, it was taken to the Supreme Court and they agreed that Ohio’s obscenity law was unconstitutional. (“Mapp v. Ohio 1961”)

Civil rights were changed because police must have a warrant to search a person or their belongings due to the exclusionary rule. This gave civilians more privacy and protection. (“Mapp v. Ohio 1961”)

There had been similar trials which caused the Supreme Court to modify the law. Now, information that was taken without a legal warrant cannot be used in court to convict the defendant. (“Mapp v. Ohio 1961”)

California v. AcevedoCalifornia v. Acevedo

A man had multiple bags of marijuana which he took into his house. A man had multiple bags of marijuana which he took into his house. He then left his house in a car with only one bag. Officers stopped He then left his house in a car with only one bag. Officers stopped him and searched him. They found the drugs. Acevedo is trying to him and searched him. They found the drugs. Acevedo is trying to suppress the marijuana as evidence because it wasn’t under suppress the marijuana as evidence because it wasn’t under warrant. warrant.

44thth Amendment guards against unreasonable searches and Amendment guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. It also requires one to have an arrest or search warrant seizures. It also requires one to have an arrest or search warrant with probable cause. with probable cause.

Impact: “The police may search an automobile and the containers Impact: “The police may search an automobile and the containers within it where they have probable cause to believe contraband or within it where they have probable cause to believe contraband or evidence is contained.”evidence is contained.”

The court noted that the warrant requirement previously had The court noted that the warrant requirement previously had depended on a “curious line between the search of an automobile depended on a “curious line between the search of an automobile that coincidentally turns up a container and the search of a that coincidentally turns up a container and the search of a container that coincidentally turns up in an automobile. container that coincidentally turns up in an automobile.

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1990/1990_89_1690http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1990/1990_89_1690

New Jersey v. T.L.O., 1985•TLO was thought to have drugs cause she was caught smoking in the bathroom.•TLO was searched by Vis-principle, and found to have drugs (pot/pipes/huge sum of moneys, and lists of names).•Attorney said the school violated the 4th amendment by performing an unreasonable search•The supreme court ruled against it because the school had reasonable cause for the search, also ruling schools do not have to obey as strictly as the police do.

Katz vs. U.S.• Federal agents wire tapped a public phone, because of a suspicion that Katz was transmitting gambling information to clients in separate states.

• The question brought to the case was if the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures require a warrant in order to wiretap the public pay phone.

• The consensus was yes, for you conversation on a phone, public or otherwise, is your own, and is private.

• Because the phone was public property, the concept of “person, not location” was brought into focus.

Miranda

Sheppard V. Maxwell 373• Though the discussion of freedom

there should be the widest range necessary with a fair and in order of an administration of justice. It must not be able to turn away from a trial from the many tasks based off of evidence provided in court.

• Involves 6th Amendment which gives the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury where the crime was committed. It should be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation to be confronted with the witnesses against them and in his favor.

• Impact on Civil Rights is that people should be given fair trial and they shouldn’t be accused unless there is evidence to prove that they are guilty

• Reason for the change and definition of rights is that since the state trial judge didn’t fulfill his duty to protect Sheppard from the prejudicial publicity which saturated community and to control disruptive influences in the courtroom they can postpone the trial until the accused person is proven guilty or they can transfer them to a different city.

Memorial websitehttp://www.oyez.org/Sheppard Vs. Maxwell case

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)~Sixth Amendment~~Sixth Amendment~

Clarence Earl Gideon requested a lawyer and was denied the Clarence Earl Gideon requested a lawyer and was denied the right. right.

The judge had state that, under Florida state law, they could The judge had state that, under Florida state law, they could only appoint Counsel to someone who had committed a only appoint Counsel to someone who had committed a capital crime.capital crime.

It impacted civil rights by allowing everyone, no matter their It impacted civil rights by allowing everyone, no matter their crime, to have a lawyer and fair trial.crime, to have a lawyer and fair trial.

It was changed because the Supreme Court didn’t want to It was changed because the Supreme Court didn’t want to see anyone else denied a fair trial.see anyone else denied a fair trial.

Sources: packet, http://usinfo.org/docs/democracy/67.htmSources: packet, http://usinfo.org/docs/democracy/67.htm

Kimbrough v. United StatesViolating 8th Amendment- Fines for crack and fines for

powder are different because there is a clear difference in the way individuals were treated when found in

possession of the drug.Problem: The judge was changing the prior guidelines for drug violations and therefore sentencing Kimbrough for a

shorter time than necessary but this sentence went against the previous guidelines. The conclusion was that

a minimum sentence would be alright.Civil Rights Change: Judges must make a sentence within the guidelines so fairness is evident for both the offender

and community.Reason for Change: It is against the eight amendment for a judge to change the guidelines or fines already set by

the United States for drug sentencing. packet provided by Mrs. Oehler and http://topics.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/06-7949

Death Penalty

• Eighth Amendment-Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

• People are not always sentenced according to crime but sentenced because of race, gender, etc.

• Be more specific on the definition of cruel and unusual punishment is.

• Supreme Court Cases: Baze v. Rees (2009), Hill v. McDonough (2006), Roper v. Simmons (2005), Miller-El v. Dretke (2005), Banks v. Dretke (2004), Ring v. Arizona (2002), Atkins v. Virginia (2002).

• Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution• http://www.civilrights.org/criminal-justice/death-penalty/• Text Book p.405

Graham vs. Florida

• According to “Graham v. Florida”, Terrance Jamar received a charge for life in prison with no probation at 17

•Charge was for robbery and a separate home invasion

• According to “Supreme Rules Out Some Life Sentences for Juveniles”, the charge violated the right of no cruel or unusual punishment (8th Amendment)

• Now, juveniles cannot be sentenced for life with out parole (unless guilty of homicide)

• Juveniles should be given a chance to change in prison

http://www.fresno-law.net/images/man-in-jail.jpg

McCulloch v. Maryland

•Took place in Maryland 1818

•Maryland chartered the second bank of the US by imposing taxes upon the Bank

•A one James W. McCulloch refused to pay the taxes

•The Court held that Maryland legislation could not tax instruments of the nation government

•The court decided that “Constitutional laws reign supreme over state laws.”

Roe Vs. Wade

• 9th Amendment– Rights can

not be restricted to those enumerated in the constitution.

• A woman has the rights over her own body, and government interference in the private lives of individuals.

The United States supreme court ruled the women's’ right is determined by the stages of pregnancy, and the state cannot prohibit abortion before viability. Viability means potentially able to live outside the mother’s womb. (usually 7 months).

Regents of U.C. v. Bakke (1978) White man applied twice at a medical school, denied both

times Sued the school that he would have been accepted if they

didn’t have 16 places set aside for only minority students because of Affirmative Action program, trial court found school in violation of 14th amendment

Supreme court was divided equally on who was right, eventually gave the man admission to the school

Decided that the program gave minority students unfair advantage over other students

sources: regents of u.c. v. Bakke article"Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, U.S. Supreme Court Case Summary & Oral

Argument." The Oyez Project | U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument Recordings, Case Abstracts and More. Web. 20 May 2010. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_76_811>.

Brown V. Board of Education1954

• Affected the 14th amendment• The freedom in question was; it violated the

equal protection clause.• Set the way for the civil rights movement .• It put a stop to segregation in schools.• "Brown v. Board of Education." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.

17 May 2010. Web. 20 May 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education>.

• Edit• Remy, Richard C. United States Government: Democracy In Action.

Westville, Ohio, 1999. 309+. Print.

• Tessa and Sammi