1. The Warren Court, Roe v. Wade, & School Rights Cases
US History

2. Chief Justice Earl Warren
Civil Rights:
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US (1964)
Rights of the Accused:
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

3. Roe v. Wade (1973) Chief Justice WarRen Burger
Background:
Jane Roe (pseudonym) wanted to have an abortion, but Texas law prohibited abortions unless it was rape or incest.
Legal Questions:
Can states prohibit abortion?
Legal Decision:
No (7-2)
Impact:
Legalizes abortion in all states. Continues to be a controversial decision as Pro-Choice and Pro-Life sides battle over the issue in the “culture wars.”

4. School Rights Cases Engel v. Vitale (1962) [Warren]
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) [Warren]
New Jersey v. TLO (1985)
Venonia v. Acton (1995)
Morse v. Frederick (2007)

5. Court Case thematic essay

6. Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954)
Background:
Oliver Brown wanted to send his daughter Linda to the neighborhood school but was unable to do so due to segregation laws.
Legal Questions:
Do Topeka’s segregation laws violate the equal protection clause in the 14th Amendment?
Legal Decision:
Yes (9-0)
Impact:
Separate is inherently unequal. Schools should be desegregated with “all deliberate speed.”

7. Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US (1964)
Background:
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited segregation in public accommodations. The Heart of Atlanta Motel wanted to be able to choose its own customers.
Legal Questions:
Was the CRA of 1964 constitutional?
Legal Decision:
Yes (9-0)
Impact:
Legalizes the CRA of 1964 essentially ending legal segregation in the United States.

8. Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Background: Legal Question(s): Legal Decision:
The police searched Mapp’s home without a search warrant and found and used incriminating evidence against her.
Legal Question(s):
Can evidence obtained without a search warrant be used in a trial?
Legal Decision:
No (9-0)
Impact:
Courts cannot use illegally obtained evidence. Protects the rights of the accused. Upsets conservatives who see a weakening in law and order.

9. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) Background: Legal Question(s):
Gideon was too poor to afford an attorney. He asked for one, but was denied.
Legal Question(s):
Was Gideon’s right to a fair trial (6th Amendment) denied?
Legal Decision:
Yes (9-0)
Impact:
Declares that the right to a lawyer is part of a fair trial. Protects the rights of the accused.

10. Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Background: Legal Question(s):
Ernesto Miranda was arrested for rape and kidnapping. He was subsequently questioned without being informed of his legal rights and admitted to the crime.
Legal Question(s):
Do the accused need to be informed of their rights? (In this case, the right to remain silent)
Legal Decision:
Yes (5-4)
Impact:
People accused of crimes must be informed of their legal rights. Protects the rights of the accused. Upsets conservatives who see a weakening in law and order.

11. Engel v. Vitale (1962) Background: Legal Question(s): Legal Decision:
New York State allowed schools to say a short non- denominational prayer each morning.
Legal Question(s):
Did NY violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment?
Legal Decision:
Yes (6-1)
Impact:
Limits the expression of religion in public schools/places. Upsets religious conservatives.

12. Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Background: Legal Question(s):
John and Mary Beth Tinker wore arm bands to school to protest the Vietnam War and were suspended from school.
Legal Question(s):
Did the school violate their free speech rights by not allowing the kids to wear the armbands?
Legal Decision:
Yes (7-2)
Impact:
Silent speech is protected. Students do not abandon their rights at the schoolhouse door.

13. New Jersey v. TLO (1985) Background: Legal Question(s):
TLO was caught smoking at school. When the principal searched her purse, he found marijuana and drug paraphernalia.
Legal Question(s):
Did the search violate the 4th Amendment right to privacy?
Legal Decision:
No (6-3)
Impact:
Limits the rights of students in schools. School officials may act with “reasonable” cause just as parents would.

14. Vernonia v. Acton (1995) Background: Legal Question(s):
Vernonia Schools District adopted a policy of random drug testing for student athletes. James Acton, a student, refused to submit to drug testing.
Legal Question(s):
Did the search violate the 4th Amendment right to privacy?
Legal Decision:
No (6-3)
Impact:
Limits the rights of students in schools. Since athletes require extra supervision, the school may exercise more control over their lives than regular adults. Also, the drug test was a minimal intrusion.

15. John and Mary Beth Tinker