Supreme Court Cases

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

• Debate - Should Sup. Court Order

  Cong. and Jefferson to Install Marbury?

• Constitutional Document - Article 3

  • Original Jurisdiction - 1st time

  • Appealate Jurisdiction - After

• Why it matters - Confirmed Seperations of Power and Judicial Review - Ruling laws unconstitutional making them null and void

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

- Why it matters - Expands federal “implied powers”

• Context - Federal Bank was charged by Maryland government, but the national banker refused to pay them

• Arguments

  • Maryland argued that the federal government didn’t have the power to create a bank - not enumerated under Article 1 Section 8

  • McCulloch argued that they did due to the necessary and proper clause - implied powers

• Federal trumps State laws

Schenck v. US (1919) (Clear and Present Danger)

- Why it matters: Allows limits to speech based on the “clear and present danger” principle

• Espionage Act - Stop hinderances to military recruitment

• Constitutional Principle - 1st Amendment right to free speech was violated by the act

• Ruled in favor of US - Unanimous

  • Your speech can’t create danger

  • Speech can be more infringed in times of war

• Now the Brandenburg Test is used - Which focuses on intent and makes silencing speech more difficult

Brown v. Board of Ed. (1954) (Segregation)

• Why it Matter: Overturned Plessy ruling in regard to public schools.

• Series of cases involving racial segreagtation in schools

• Plessy v. Ferguson - Ruled that segreation was okay as long as it was equal (Seperate but Equal Doctrine)

• Constitutional Principle - Racial Segregation was a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment

• Also it said that seperating black children generates feeling of inferiority making seperation in itself unequal

• Courts ordered that schools should be intergrated with ‘all delibrate speed’ so of course many schools still aren’t integrated

Baker v. Carr (1962) (Districting)

- Holds the court may intervene in appointment cases and that every citizen’s vote carries equal weight (one person one vote doctrine)

• Rural voters were given more voting power than urban voters

• Constitutional Principle - 14th Amendment (Equal protection clause)

• All citizens in tennesse were not protected due to more power to certain votes

• Got the supreme court involved in some political issues

Engel v. Vitale (1962) (Prayers)

- Says that there can be no school-led prayer in public schools

• Constitutional Principle: 1st Amendment (Establishment clause: Fed can’t establish religion)

  • This is tied into the states through the 14th Amendment

• 6-1 Ruled that it did violate the 1st Amendment

• Ruled in favor of individual liberty (effected the relationship between government and religion)

Gideon v. Wainright (1963) (Right to attorney)

- Requires that states provide defendants with attorneys in state courts

• Gideon commited a crime but wasn’t given lawyer (It was argued that the 6th Amendment didn’t apply to state crimes)

• However Gideon’s repersentation argued that due to the 14th Amendment equal protection clause tied this amendment into the states

N.Y. Times v. US (1971)

- Limits prior restraint of the press

• Facts: Nixon’s administration lied about America winning the war (The government was lying)

• New york published these findings and was sent an order to cease more (prior restraint)

• Constitutional Principle: The freedom of press in the 1st amendment

  • Nixon’s admin argued that this was justified because the publication threatened national security

• The court agreed that this was a violation - the bar to clear for prior restraint is very high (censorship can’t just be done willy nilly)

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) (Amish)

• Amish family was fined for removing children in 8th grade due to compulsory education law

• Constitutional Principle: Free Excercise clause in 1st Amendment

• The court ruled unanimously that this was a violation - this put personal liberty in excercising religion over state laws

Shaw v. Reno (1993) (Gerrymandering NC)

Gerrymandering - Drawing of Congressional lines so one group is favored (In this case it’s racial)

• Constitutional Principle: 14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause)

  • Every person should have the same voting power

  • It was ruled that drawing such lines was a violation of this and could lead to future problems if not addressed

United States v. Lopez (1995) (Guns but not 2nd Amendment)

• Facts: Alfonso Lopez brought a gun to school, because it was prohibited he was charged with a federal crime

• Through the commerce clause the federal government made this regulation

  • Which was beyond the scope of it’s power according to Lopez - They believed it was a power given only to the states

• This case is more about federalism then guns (it argues that the fed. gov can’t use any reasoning to pass laws that should be state laws)

Mcdonald v. Chicago (2010) (Guns)

Heller v. D.C (2008) - Ruling that restrictive gun laws were too much (This only applied to federal teritory)

• Constitutional Principle: 2nd Amendment was violated

• This is applied to the states through 14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause) (Seletive Incorporation)

Citizens United v. FEC (2010) (SuperPacs)

• This related to Campaign Finance Laws

• BCRA made it illegal for corps/non-profits to smear candidates 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a election

• Citizens United made a smear movie against Hillary but couldn’t release is because of the BCRA law so they sued

• Constitutional Principle: This was a violation of the 1st Amendment right to free speech

• They ruled that this was a violation because corps are just asociations of people so rights extend to them as well

  • Also said that people with more money should have a bigger voice

Tinker v. Des Moines

• Facts: Tinkers war peace arm bands to school and the school suspended them

• Constitutional Principle: This was a violation of Free speech under 1st Amendment

  • The debate was on whether this was a justifiable violation of free speech

  • 7-2 ruled it was a violation

  • The court created substantial disruption test to decide whether speech can be blocked in schools

  • (1985) Bethel school district v. Fraser - the speech in schools can’t be nasty