1. Historic Supreme Court Cases
Why Are They “Historic” ?

2. Remember
The Supreme Court does NOT pass the laws; they INTERPRET the laws that are passed by Congress and enforced by the president. They look at the Constitution, interpret its meaning, and determine the outcomes of cases. They are the FINAL AUTHORITY of all laws. What they say goes. (Just like Mr. Muckian)

3. Marbury v. Madison, 1803
Marbury v. Madison was the landmark case that established the Supreme Court’s right to rule on constitutional questions.
It also expanded the power of the Supreme Court by giving them “judicial review,” or the power of the courts to overturn laws passed by Congress or acts of the president and declare them unconstitutional if they conflict with the Constitution.
This decision created the most powerful judicial branch in the world.
to left, a portrait of plaintiff William Marbury

4. McCullough v. Maryland, 1819
In McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to create the Second Bank of the United States and that the state of Maryland lacked the power to tax the bank.
McCulloch gave Congress broad discretionary power to laws that were “necessary and proper.”

5. Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) vastly expanded the powers of Congress through a single clause in the Constitution: the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8.
The Court ruled that under that clause, Congress had powers to regulate any aspect of commerce that crossed state lines, including modes of transportation, and that such regulation preempted conflicting regulation by the states.
Since Gibbons, the Commerce Clause has provided the basis for sweeping congressional power over a multitude of national issues.

6. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857
This Supreme Court case dealt with the issue of slavery, freedom, and citizenship.
Scott sued for his freedom after he was moved from slave state to free state.
The Supreme Court sidestepped entire question of slave or free and ruled that Scott was not a citizen of the US; therefore, he could not sue.

7. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857
“We think they [people of African ancestry] are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word ‘citizens’ in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States.”
— Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, speaking for the majority

8. Question: Dred Scott v. Sandford
The Supreme Court ruled that because Dred Scott was not a citizen of the United States, he could not sue the federal government. Is this true today for illegal immigrants?

9. Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896
In the pivotal case of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, the US Supreme Court ruled that racially separate facilities, if equal, did not violate the Constitution.
The “separate but equal” doctrine was not discrimination.

10. Plessy v. Ferguson
In 1890 a new Louisiana law required railroads to provide “equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored, races.”
On June 7, 1892, Homer Plessy (picture right), who was one-eighth black refused to move from a seat reserved for whites. He was arrested.
Judge John H. Ferguson upheld the law, and the case of Plessy v. Ferguson slowly moved up to the Supreme Court.
On May 18, 1896, the US Supreme Court, with only one dissenting vote, ruled that segregation in America was constitutional.

11. Brown v. Board of Education, 1954
Brown v. Board of Education (1954), now acknowledged as one of the greatest Supreme Court decisions of the twentieth century, unanimously held that the racial segregation of children in public schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, thus overturning the “separate but equal” doctrine imposed by Plessy v. Ferguson from 1896.

12. Brown v. Board of Education
“Minors of the Negro race seek the aid of the Courts in obtaining admission to the public schools on a non-segregated basis. They have been denied admission to schools attended by white children We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of “separate but equal” has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold the plaintiffs have been deprived of the equal protection guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.”

14. Mapp v. Ohio, 1961
Dollree Mapp lived in Cleveland, Ohio, where police forcibly entered her house without a search warrant and found obscene items. After being prosecuted and convicted, Mapp appealed her conviction to the Supreme Court.
In Mapp, the Court stated that the Fourth Amendment protects all citizens in all states against illegal search and seizures.
Evidence illegally obtained could NOT be introduced in trial.
After Mapp, the use of search warrants increased dramatically in all states.

15. Engel v. Vitale, 1962
The state of New York had written a law that required school children to recite a prayer at the beginning of each school day.
The Supreme Court used the Engel decision to declare that law unconstitutional (thereby forbidding required school prayer) as a violation of the Establishment Clause and a breaching of the separation of church and state.

16. Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963
The landmark 1963 US Supreme Court decision Gideon v. Wainwright, which established the right to counsel (Sixth Amendment) in criminal cases.
With the Gideon case, the Supreme Court recognized that every defendant, whether wealthy or poor, is guaranteed the right to a lawyer if they are charged with a crime.

17. Miranda v. Arizona, 1966
In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination (Fifth and Sixth Amendments).
A mug shot of Ernesto Miranda, whose wrongful conviction led to the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, in which the Court held that detained criminal suspects must be informed of their rights prior to police questioning.

18. Tinker v. Des Moines, 1969
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, (1969) resulted in a decision defining the constitutional rights of students in US public schools.
The Courts held that students were entitled to the protection of the First Amendment (freedom of speech (including symbolic) unless that speech disrupted the learning process.
(Pictured here are Mary Beth Tinker, leader of the movement, and her mother.)

19. Roe v. Wade, 1973
The Court ruled that the states were forbidden from outlawing or regulating any aspect of abortion performed during the first trimester of pregnancy, could only enact abortion regulations reasonably related to maternal health in the second and third trimesters, and could enact abortion laws protecting the life of the fetus only in the third trimester.
Controversial from the moment it was released, Roe v. Wade politically divided the nation more than any other recent case and continues to inspire heated debates, politics, and even violence today (“the culture wars”).

20. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 1978
In Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that a university’s sole use of racial “quotas” in its admissions process was unconstitutional, but a school’s use of “affirmative action” to accept more minority applicants was constitutional in some circumstances.

21. Texas v. Johnson, 1989
In protest to Ronald Regan’s Administration, Gregory Johnson burned an American flag in front of the Dallas City Hall.
The Supreme Court decided, 5-4, that desecrating a flag in political protest is an act of expression protected by the First Amendment.
The Court found that flag burning was political speech that is the “principle underlying the First Amendment.” An expression of free speech cannot be prohibited under the basis that society views it as offensive.

22. Planned Parenthood v. Casey
In 1982, Pennsylvania passed the Abortion Control Act requiring women to have 1) “informed consent”, 2) 24 hour waiting period, 3) inform their husbands, 4) receive parental permission (if minor).
Court ruled that due process clause of the 14th Amendment means that ONLY informing husband was an “undue burden,” but other aspects of the law were constitutional and NOT an “undue burden”

23. Fisher v. Texas
Constitutional question was whether affirmative action could be used to promote diversity in public schools, or if this violated the Equal Protection Clause.
Used precedent of Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) to show that diversity in public schools can be a defense, but cannot be sole criteria for admittance into a public university.
Court eventually sides with University of Texas that race-conscious admissions does not violate Equal Protection Clause.

24. Lee v. Weisman
At a public school in Rhode Island, a rabbi was invited to perform the benediction at a graduation ceremony, but was challenged under the establishment clause provision of the 1st Amendment.
School argued that the prayer did not violate establishment clause because it did not involve government coercion of religion, but respondent argued that it did because it violated the Lemon Test and the precedent of Engel v. Vitale ruled prayer in school violated Establishment clause.
Court ruled in favor of respondent (Weisman) that prayers at public school graduation ceremonies violate the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment through the Lemon Test.

25. NY Times v. US
NY Times began publishing reports from the Department of Defense (Pentagon Papers) but was sued by Nixon Administration under the guise of Executive Privilege that the Executive branch argued should prevent publishing these articles.
SCOTUS ruled that this would be an example of prior restraint and would violate the 1st Amendment Freedom of the Press – government cannot prohibit publication of material prior to its publication.