1. The Warren Court (1950s-1960s) How did the Supreme Court (under the leadership of Earl Warren) expand the rights of individuals?

2. Civil Liberties v. Civil Rights Civil Rights: The right of an individual to NOT be discriminated against –In other words…..equality –14 th Amendment, Civil Rights Act of 1964 Civil Liberties: Individual rights that are a result of restrictions placed on the power of the government In other words…..freedoms Bill of Rights (free speech, right to privacy, due process, etc.)

3. The Warren Court (1950s – 1960s) Judicial activism: judges “make laws” by interpreting the law in a way that the majority does not like –Expanded individual freedom for unpopular groups or behaviors at expense of accepted social norms (ex: banning school prayer, granting criminals rights) –Criticized for “loose interpretation” of Bill of Rights (ex: Roe v. Wade and 4 th Amendment) –Decisions expanded civil rights and change how we interpret our civil liberties

4. The Warren Court (1950s – 1960s) For each case explain how the Warren Court EXPANDED the rights of individuals through its ruling (ex: What NEW rights was gained or what NEW interpretation was introduced?) 1.Rights of the Accused Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Gideon v. Wainright (1963) Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 2. Expanding Civil Liberties: Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Engle v. Vitale (1962) Roe v. Wade (1973) 3.Expanding Civil Rights: Brown v. Board of Education (1954) 4.Student’s Rights T.L.O. v. New Jersey (1984)****

5. The Warren Court (1950s – 1960s) Rights of the Accused: 1.Mapp v. Ohio (1961): created “exclusionary rule” – police can only use evidence obtained legally – must be on warrant 4.Gideon v. Wainright: public defenders are required for all serious criminal cases regardless of ability to afford (6 th amendment) 6. Miranda v. Arizona: protection against self- incrimination. Police must read “Miranda rights” (5 th amendment)

6. The Warren Court (1950s – 1960s) Rights of Students 2.Tinker v. Des Moines: Students have free speech rights so long as their speech does not pose a disruption to learning 3.Engel v. Vitale: School prayer forces religion on students and therefore violates the 1 st amendment 7.Brown v. Board of Education: Segregation of public schools is unconstitutional. “Separate is inherently unequal” 8. ****TLO v. New Jersey: Students can be searched more easily in school than on the street (“reasonable suspicion” v. “Probable cause”)