1. Landmark Supreme Court Cases
Objective: Recap highlights of precedents set by major Supreme Court cases

2. Roe v. Wade People: Jane Roe v. Wade (D.A. of Texas) Question/Crux:
Are abortions legal (if giving birth does not harm the mother)?
Factors considered:
Right to privacy, equality under the law (14th amendment)
Holding:
A state cannot take away a woman’s right to an abortion

3. *Miranda v. Arizona People: Ernesto Miranda v. State of AZ
Question/Crux:
Does not reading someone their rights violate the 5th amendment?
Factors considered:
Miranda confessed to a crime, BUT did not know his rights
Holding:
A person must be informed of “Miranda Rights” when arrested
-Expanded the constitutional rights of people
Accused of crimes.

4. *Plessy v. Ferguson Questions/Crux:
Should segregation be allowed? Can separate be equal?
Factors considered:
separate facility (railroad car) for African-Americans
Holding:
Segregation IS lawful because separate CAN be equal
-Known as separate BUT equal doctrine. (14th Ammendment)

5. *Brown v. Board of Edu, Topeka
People:
Brown family v. BoE in Topeka, KS
Question/Crux:
Is separate in schools equal?
Factors considered:
The black school was sub-standard compared to the white school
Plessy v. Ferguson
Holding:
Plessy v. Ferguson overturned; Separate is not equal, schools are integrated. Equal Protection under the law.

6. *US v. Nixon
People:
President Richard Nixon’s impeachment by US Congress
Question/Crux:
Did the President have to hand over his recorded conversations possibly incriminating him in Watergate?
Factors considered:
“Executive Privilege” allows private/protected speech between the Pres. and his aids
Holding:
President is NOT above the law.

7. McCulloch v. Maryland People: McCulloch (bank manager) v. State of MD
Question/Crux:
It is lawful for the government to create a national bank? Can a state tax a federal bank?
Factors considered:
McCulloch refused to pay taxes to MD b/c he said that federal institutions are superior to state AND it was “necessary and proper” for the gov’t to establish a bank
Decision:
Sided with McCulloch, states CANNOT tax a federal bank b/c:
Supremacy Clause
Necessary and Proper Clause

8. *Marbury v. Madison People:
Marbury (wanted to become judge) v. Madison (Sec. of State)
Question/Crux:
Did the Supreme Court have to force Pres. Jefferson to allow Marbury to be a judge?
Factors considered:
Supreme Court was not yet equal to other branches
Holding:
Gave us Judicial Review

9. Gibbons v. Ogden People:
Aaron Ogden, Thomas Gibbons- rival steamboat operators
Question/Crux:
Who has the ultimate authority to regulate interstate commerce?
Factors considered:
NY granted Ogden a monopoly to operate his boats on a stretch of water between NY and NJ. Gibbons began to work the same stretch of water, so Ogden sued Gibbons to force him to stop working that stretch. When Ogden won, Gibbons appealed to SCOTUS.
Holding:
Gibbons won. Gibbons was allowed to work the same stretch of water because the federal government regulates interstate commerce, not states.

10. Brandenburg v. Ohio People: Brandenburg (KKK) Question/Crux:
Can the KKK promote hate speech legally?
Factors considered:
1st amendment protects free speech
Holding:
YES. The KKK can rally and meet in public; they just cannot act upon their hate speech (attack anyone)

11. Tinker v. Des Moines People: John and Marybeth Tinker Question/Crux:
Can students wear arm bands protesting the Vietnam war if the school dress code prohibits it?
Factors considered:
1st amendment protects free speech; is clothing free speech?
Do students have the right to this freedom in school?
Holding:
YES. The students can legally wear their armbands; clothing is freedom of speech.

12. Engel v. Vitale People: Parents in a NY school district Question/Crux:
Can the school broadcast a prayer over the intercom in the morning?
Factors considered:
1st amendment protects freedom of religion; does a school prayer violate this?
Holding:
YES. The school is violating the freedom of religion by broadcasting a prayer over the intercom.
NO school prayer shall be allowed.

13. Koresmatsu v. USA People: Koresmatu, a Japanese American
Question/Crux:
Can FDR legally require Japanese Americans to relocate to ‘containment camps’ due to Japan attacking US at Pearl Harbor (1941)?
Factors considered:
Is Korematsu’s rights being violated based on (and other Japanese Americans) 14th amendment equal protection based on race and ethnicity?
Holding:
NO. The President CAN make decisions limiting citizens’ rights in times of war.

14. Texas v. Johnson People: Gregory Johnson, a disgruntled American
Question/Crux:
Is burning the American flag protected speech (symbolic speech) under the 1st amendment?
Factors considered:
Is symbolic speech the same as verbal speech in the eyes of the law/constitution?
Holding:
YES. The SCOTUS found that Johnson’s act, though disrespectful, is a form of protected speech (symbolic speech).

15. *Gideon v. Wainwright People:
Gideon, financially indigent (poor) man caught robbing a pool hall
Question/Crux:
Does the 6th amendment entitle everyone the right to a lawyer, even the poor?
Factors considered:
Original judge denied Gideon’s right to a lawyer, thus Gideon poorly represented himself in court
Holding:
found that Gideon should have been appointed a free lawyer because the 6th amendment does in fact guarantee everyone the right to counsel
-Expanded the constitutional rights of people
Accused of crimes.

16. Dred Scott v. Sanford People:
Dred Scott, a slave who had been living in a free state
Question/Crux:
Should Dred Scott be set free based on a) he lived in a free state, and b) his master had died
Factors considered:
The USA was locked in a hot debate over the status of slaves and slavery as an institution during this time
Holding:
The SCOTUS found that Scott was not going to be free because he (and other African-Americans) were not citizens

17. Schenck v. USA
People:
Charles Schenck, a ‘communist’ American against involvement in WW1
Question/Crux:
Is Schenck’s passing out flyers to men drafted to fight telling them they are becoming ‘enslaved’ protected by his 1st amendment freedom of speech?
Factors considered:
Are there limits on a person’s free speech, especially during times of war?
Holding:
The SCOTUS found that Schenck’s flyers were not protected by his 1st amendment. This case created the “clear and present danger test,” which limits free speech that could cause danger

18. *Mapp v. Ohio People: Dollree Mapp Question/Crux:
Should evidence gained without a search warrant be permissible in a trial?
Factors considered:
The police found illegal ‘obscene pictures’ in Mapp’s home while they were there searching for a suspected bomber
Holding:
The SCOTUS found that evidence obtained without a search warrant is NOT permissible in court
-Expanded the constitutional rights of people
Accused of crimes.

19. Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier People: Hazelwood School District
Questions/Crux:
Were students’ 1st amendment rights denied when the principal of their school censored their newspaper by removing two controversial articles?
Factors considered:
Is a student newspaper truly a press item? Are students subject to the rules of the school they attend?
Holding:
The SCOTUS found that the principal WAS allowed to censor the school newspaper, and that the students’ first amendment rights were NOT violated.

20. Meyer v. Nebraska-1923 People: Zion Parochial School & Teacher
Questions/Crux: Does forbidding that foreign language be taught violate the 14th amendment that protects us under due process?
Factors considered:
Is it unconstitutional for a state to ban the teaching of foreign languages?
-Does the statute infringe on the liberty guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment?
Holding:
Found that a law restricting foreign-language education violated the Due Process clause
of the Fourteenth Amendment.

21. New Jersey v. T.L.O. People: Questions/Crux:
 Piscataway Township High School freshmen & Principal
Questions/Crux:
Does the Fourth Amendment’s “prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures applies to searches conducted by public school officials?
Factors considered: discipline/safety
Holding: Unconstitutional for principals and teachers to search students & their
belongings, unless there is good reason (like safety & discipline) and the search
doesn’t go too far.

22. *Furman v. Georgia
Ruled that death penalty was unconstitutional if it was being applied unfairly. (not equal to races.)