2. Judicial Branch

4. Chief Justice John Roberts 2005 Bush (#2)

5. John Paul Stevens/Elena Kagan 19752010 FordObama

6. Antonin Scalia 1986 Reagan

7. Anthony Kennedy 1988 Reagan

8. David Souter/Sonia Sotomayor 19902010 Bush (#1)Obama

9. Clarence Thomas 1991 Bush (#1)

10. Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1993 Clinton

11. Steven Breyer 1994 Clinton

12. Samuel Alito 2006 Bush (#2)

14. Jurisdiction Original Jurisdiction- hear case first Appellate Jurisdiction- hear case on appeal ----------------------------------------------------------- Exclusive Jurisdiction- only federal courts Concurrent Jurisdiction- state and federal

15. Two BORING but Important Cases Marbury v. Madison (1803) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

16. Marbury v. Madison (1803) Established use of JUDICIAL REVIEW

17. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) *Established IMPLIED POWERS by upholding the Necessary and Proper Clause

18. Usted tiene el derecho de guardar silencio/mantener silencio. Lo que diga puede ser usado en su contra. Tiene el derecho a un abogado y tenerlo presente durante interrogacion. Si no tiene dinero para conseguir un abogado, uno le sera designado antes de cualquier pregunta, si usted desea.]

19. Miranda v. Arizona 1966

23. The person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he has the right to remain silent, and that anything he says will be used against him in court; he must be clearly informed that he has the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation, and that, if he is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to represent him.

24. If the individual indicates in any manner, at any time prior to or during questioning, that he wishes to remain silent, the interrogation must cease... If the individual states that he wants an attorney, the interrogation must cease until an attorney is present. At that time, the individual must have an opportunity to confer with the attorney and to have him present during any subsequent questioning.

25. Miranda Rights You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to have an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.

26. Gideon v Wainwright 1963

27. Clarence Gideon

28. 6 th Amendment= “assistance of counsel for his defense” 5 th Amendment= nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law 14 th Amendment= nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law Due Process= legal procedures MUST be followed

29. Gideon v Wainwright If a person cannot afford an attorney, then one must be provided.

30. 6 th Amendment= “assistance of counsel for his defense” 5 th Amendment= nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law 14 th Amendment= nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law Due Process= legal procedures MUST be followed

31. Mapp v. Ohio 1963

35. Mapp v. Ohio Evidence obtained by illegal means is inadmissible in court.

36. Gideon v Wainwright 1963

37. Clarence Gideon

38. Gideon v Wainwright If a person cannot afford an attorney, then one must be provided.

39. Have an average to above average afternoon!

40. What…. what???????? Miranda v Arizona Gideon v Wainwright Mapp v Ohio No Warrant= No Evidence Police must read rights No $$= given an attorney

41. What…. what???????? Miranda v Arizona Gideon v Wainwright Mapp v Ohio Police must read rights No $$= given an attorney No Warrant= No Evidence

42. What…..what???? Part 2 You best be Gideon me an attorney You’ll need a Mapp with that warrant Miranda

43. New Jersey v TLO 1985

44. New Jersey v TLO

45. School officials can search under “reasonable suspicion” Reasonable versus Probable

46. Tinker v Des Moines (1969)

47. "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

48. Tinker Test Disrupt classwork? Create substantial disorder? Interfere with the rights of others?

49. Tinker v Des Moines (1969) The court upheld students right to free speech.

50. Bethel School v Fraser 1986

51. "I know a man who is firm - he's firm in his pants, he's firm in his shirt, his character is firm - but most of all, his belief in you the students of Bethel, is firm. Jeff Kuhlman is a man who takes his point and pounds it in. If necessary, he'll take an issue and nail it to the wall. He doesn't attack things in spurts - he drives hard, pushing and pushing until finally - he succeeds. Jeff is a man who will go to the very end - even the climax, for each and every one of you. So please vote for Jeff Kuhlman, as he'll never come between us and the best our school can be. He is firm enough to give it everything."

52. Bethel School Policy "Conduct which materially and substantially interferes with the educational process is prohibited, including the use of obscene, profane language or gestures."

53. Bethel School v Fraser Schools can limit disruptive/ inappropriate speech

54. What…..what???? Part 2 You best be Gideon me an attorney You’ll need a Mapp with that warrant Miranda

55. Morse v Fredrick 2007

57. Morse v Fredrick See Bethel v Fraser Same rules apply to extracurricular events

58. You best be Gideon me an attorney You’ll need a Mapp with that warrant Miranda TLO- Take your Little hands Out of my purse Morse- Beeping Banner Bethel- Bet he’ll say it! Tinker-

60. Brown v Board of Education 1954

61. Homer Plessy

65. Linda Brown and Family

68. Earl Warren

71. Charles Schenck

72. Schenck v United States 1919

73. Espionage Act 1917 Prohibited interference with military operations and recruitment

74. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.

75. Charles Schenck

76. Schenck v United States “clear and present danger” test Since replaced by the “imminent lawless action” test

77. Korematsu v. United States 1944

78. Fred Korematsu

80. Bottom Line The court has history of limiting rights during times of war.

81. Religion in the Courts Establishment Clause –“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” –Separation of church and state Equal Access Act of 1984 –Extracurricular club access to facilities –Religious clubs –Gay-Straight Alliance clubs Religious School Busing?????

82. Who should decide on gay marriage? The Court The Congress The States

83. Judicial Activism versus Judicial Restraint Should justices “legislate from the bench”? Abortion Gay Marriage

85. Jurisdiction Original Jurisdiction- Appellate Jurisdiction- ----------------------------------------------------------- Exclusive Jurisdiction- Concurrent Jurisdiction-

86. # of Justices (Supreme Court)

87. Role of Judicial Branch Hint: _______________ law

88. Length of Supreme Justice Term

89. Cases only heard in federal court

90. Schools may limit profane speech

91. Political speech is protected in school

92. Only appellate jurisdiction

93. Gideon?

94. Can be heard in BOTH federal and state courts

95. Lowest level of federal courts are called?

96. Reversed Plessy v. Ferguson

97. Reasonable Suspicion

98. When justices “legislate from the bench”

99. No speech posing “clear and present danger”

100. Establishment Clause provides separation of?

101. Miranda?