SUPREME COURT
CASES
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
• On his last day of office John Adams
appointed William Marbury to the justice
of the peace for D.C.
• Job did not become official until the
secretary of state John Marshall delivers
the necessary papers
• These were not delivered before Thomas
Jefferson took office.
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
• Jefferson ordered that the papers
not be delivered and gave the job
to someone else.
• Marbury sued asking for a writ of
mandamus (a court order) to get his
job.
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Constitutional Issue
• Did Marbury have a right to the job?
• If so, was he entitled to some
remedy under USA law?
• Was the remedy a writ of
mandamus from the Supreme
Court?
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Supreme Court Decision
• Marshall first ruled that the commission became
effective once the official seal was on the
paper, which is what was the case here.
• Marshall then ruled that Marbury was entitled
to some remedy under USA law as the job
should have been his.
• However, as for the writ that Marbury wanted,
this was a power that the court received from
the judiciary act of 1789 which was passed by
congress.
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Supreme Court Decision
• Marshall ruled tat the constitution did
not give congress the power to create
such a law so therefore the act was “null
and void”
• Although Marbury did not get his job,
from this point on S.C. established the
power of judicial review, the right to
declare a law unconstitutional.
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Maryland passed a law taxing the federal
bank.
James McCulloch ran the bank without
paying the tax.
McCulloch was arrested.
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Constitutional Issue
How to divide the power between state
and federal governments?
How far can congress push its implied
powers?
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Supreme Court Decision
Ruled in favor of McCulloch
Supremacy clause must be followed
USA is a creation of the people, not the
states.
States can’t tell federal gov’t what to do
Upheld the use of implied powers
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
• NY state gave a monopoly for a ferry
business which was to be run by Aaron
Ogden.
• Thomas Gibbons was given a license to
also run a ferry by the federal gov’t.
• Ogden sued to keep his monopoly.
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
Constitutional Issue
• What exactly was meant by commerce in
the Constitution?
• How much control does the gov’t have
over commerce?
• Is control of commerce an enumerated or
concurrent power?
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
Supreme Court Decision
• Ruled in favor of Gibbons
• Expanded the definition of commerce
which led the way to growth of a modern
economy.
Engle v. Vitale (1962)
1951 NY state approved the following prayer
to be read at school “ Almighty God, we
acknowledge our dependence upon thee, and
we beg thy blessings upon us, our parents,
and our country.”
The schools said this was a non-
denominational prayer and no student was
required to say it.
Steven Engle, a parent objected to this and
said it violated his children’s right to freedom
of religion.
Engle v. Vitale (1962)
Constitutional Issue
Was this a violation of the student’s right to
freedom of religion?
Did the daily use of the prayer although
noncompulsory, violate the establishment
clause of the 14th amendment which
separated church and state?
Engle v. Vitale (1962)
Supreme Court Decision
Court ruled that being non-denominational
and noncompulsory was not enough.
Any prayer approved by the school was in
essence the school promoting religion.
Court said that this nation was created for
religious freedom and any union between the
church and state has to be prevented.
Korematsu v. USA (1944)
After pearl harbor, all the Japanese
Americans on the west coast were sent to
concentration camps to prevent spying.
Korematsu refused to leave his home.
He was arrested.
Korematsu v. USA (1944)
Constitutional Issue
Was the executive order by the president a
violation of Korematsu’s rights?
How much power should be given to the
president in times of war?
Korematsu v. USA (1944)
Supreme Court Decision
Ruled in favor of the gov’t
President has the power in wartime to
protect the whole nation.
Being in a camp was judged to be a
responsibility of citizenship.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
• Police went to a house on a tip that a
fugitive was hiding out.
• They were refused entry.
• They went to get a warrant and forced
way into the house.
• Found only pornographic material
• No warrant was shown at trial.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Constitutional Issue
• Was the evidence found illegally?
• Can illegally found evidence be used in
a court of law?
Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Supreme
Court Decision
• Court ruled in favor of Mapp
• At both the state and the national level,
any evidence that is gathered illegally is
prohibited from being used.
Regents of the University of
California v. Bakke (1978)
• Cal U put into place affirmative action
programs for minorities.
• Bakke challenged the programs
because minority students with lower
scores were accepted before him
Regents of the University of
California v. Bakke (1978)
Constitutional Issue
• Did the affirmative action programs
violate white students equal protection
of the laws in the 14th Amendment?
• Are racial preferences always
unconstitutional?
Regents of the University of
California v. Bakke (1978)
Supreme Court Decision
• The court ruled that this was a case of
reverse discrimination.
• However, it did say that affirmative
action programs can be used as long as
race is not the only criteria.
• Also said schools do have the right to
try to promote ethnic diversity.
Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896)
Louisiana had a law that segregated
races into different cars of railroad trains.
Plessy who was 1/8th African American
decided to challenge the law by sitting in
a white section of a train.
He was arrested and thrown in jail for 20
days.
Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896) Constitutional
Issue
Were segregation laws a violation
of the 14th amendment’s “equal
protection of the law”?
Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896) Supreme Court
Decision
Court ruled that the 14th amendment
only said that states had to create an
equal playing field and that it could not
abolish distinct characteristics of race.
Segregation doesn’t imply inferiority
The law was reasonable and that it
creates the ability for all races to protect
their individuality and identity.
Said the “separate but equal” was legal.
Brown v. Board of education
of Topeka, KS (1954)
Linda Brown an African American
student was denied entry into an all
white school.
This was challenged on the grounds
that the white and black schools were
not equal and that segregation was
being used to prevent the advancement
of African American race
Brown v. Board of education
of Topeka, KS (1954)
Constitutional Issue
Were segregation laws a violation of the
14th amendment’s “equal protection of
the law”?
Brown v. Board of education
of Topeka, KS (1954)
Supreme Court Decision
Court ruled unanimously to overturn Plessy
Ruled that segregated schools did promote
the idea of inferiority of the African American
race
This affects the students ability to learn and
denies them the right to advancement
through education
Separate facilities are unequal
“separate but equal” is now illegal
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)
T.L.O was a high school freshmen
who was caught by a teacher
smoking in the girl’s bathroom.
The Assistant VP then searched her
purse to look for cigarettes.
The asst. VP found the cigarettes
and also rolling papers.
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)
This made them search more and they found
a pipe, plastic bags, a large amount of
money, card listing all the people who owed
her money for marijuana, and a letter
implicating her in drug dealing.
The evidence was turned over to the police
and she was arrested
Her parents were notified and she was
suspended from school
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)
Constitutional Issue
Was this a violation of her rights?
Was this an illegal search and seizure?
Must the school be held to the same
standards as the police when searching a
student?
New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985)
Supreme Court Decision
Ruled that the search was reasonable?
Schools do not need to meet the same standards as
the police
Said that while the students do have rights to privacy,
the rights of all students to be in safe environment is
more important
Said the search warrant requirement was
unreasonable in a school setting
Schools only need a reasonable reason to search a
student or their property as opposed to the probable
cause that a police officer would need.
Tinker v. Des Moines School
Districts (1969)
John and Mary Beth Tinker wanted to
protest the Vietnam War at school.
Decided to wear black arm bands to school
as a protest.
School board heard of this and warned
that anyone wearing arm bands will be
suspended.
The Tinkers wore the arm bands anyway
and were suspended
Tinker v. Des Moines School
Districts (1969) Constitutional
Issue
Was the wearing of the arm band a
protected example of free expression
which would be protected under the first
amendment?
Do schools have the right to prevent the
use of arm bands since it would create a
disruptive learning environment?
Tinker v. Des Moines School
Districts (1969) Supreme Court
Decision
The court ruled that the arm bands were a
protected form of speech.
Students have the same rights to free
speech as adults.
Court did agree that schools have the
right to protect the learning environment,
but in this case the wearing of the arm
bands did not create a disruptive situation.
Dartmouth College v. Woodward
(1819)
The college was created by England in 1796
In 1815, the state of NH tried to take it over for
political reasons by making it part of a state wide
educational system.
Dartmouth College v. Woodward
(1819) Constitutional Issue
Does the constitution protect private charters
granted by state governments as binding
contracts?
Dartmouth College v. Woodward
(1819) Supreme Court Decision
Ruled in favor of the college.
Said that private corp. are protected by the
constitution.
Allowed the corp. form of business to exist,
which helps the economy to grow.
Dred Scott v. Sanford
(1857)
• Dred Scott was a slave who was taken into
free territory by his master (IL)
• He sued for freedom from his master’s widow
• Case was handled by John Sanford of NY
(case involving people from 2 different
states)
Dred Scott v. Sanford
(1857) Constitutional
Issue
• Did Dred Scott qualify as a citizen who could
sue in court?
• Did he gain his freedom by living in free
territory?
• Did congress have the right to prohibit
slavery in the territories?
Dred Scott v. Sanford
(1857) Supreme Court
Decision
• Only congress can grant US Citizenship.
• Scott was not a US citizen so he could not
sue.
• Slavery was in the Const. therefore congress
cannot prohibit it in the territories.
• Opened the door for the civil war.
Gideon v. Wainwright
(1963)
Clarence Gideon, a small time thief,
was arrested for stealing a pint of
wine and change from a cigarette
machine.
He was refused a lawyer.
He was too poor to afford one, so he
defended himself and lost.
Gideon v. Wainwright
(1963) Constitutional
Issue
Does the gov’t have to appoint a
lawyer to a person who is too poor to
afford one?
Does this apply to the state or
federal levels? Felonies?
Misdemeanors?
Gideon v. Wainwright
(1963) Supreme Court
Decision
Court overturned Gideon’s sentence
said that the common person does
not have the skills to defend
themselves in court.
Therefore people are entitled to a
court appointed lawyer at any level.
Escebo v. Illinois (1964)
Danny Escebo was arrested for the
murder of his brother-in-law.
2 weeks later he was arrested and
kept from meeting his lawyer.
In custody he made incriminating
remarks which led to his conviction.
Escebo v. Illinois (1964)
Constitutional Issue
At what time does a suspect have
the right to an attorney?
Escebo v. Illinois (1964)
Supreme Court Decision
Court ruled in favor of Escebo.
Once the interrogation changes
from an information gathering
session to an accusation against the
defendant a lawyer may be present.
This prevents forced confessions.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Ernesto Miranda was arrested for
kidnapping and rape.
He was not read his rights.
He wrote a confession and was
sentenced based on that
confession to 20-30 years.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Constitutional Issue
Under what conditions is a
confession admissible in a court of
law?
How far can the police go in
getting a confession?
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Supreme Court Decision
Overturned Miranda’s conviction
A person must have their rights
read to them at the time of the
arrest.
Once rights are read, a confession
is admissible in court.
Roe v. Wade (1973)
An unmarried pregnant women called
Jane Roe challenged Texas law that
made abortions illegal except when a
doctor’s judgment said it was needed to
save the life of the mother.
Since her life was not in danger, Jane
Roe was denied an abortion.
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Constitutional Issue
Does a women have a right to privacy
in regards to her own body as protected
by the Bill of Rights and the 14th
amendment?
Does the state have the obligation to
protect the right to the life of the
unborn fetus?
Roe v. Wade (1973) Supreme
Court Decision
Court agreed that a women does have the
right to privacy, however, it also must protect
the right of “person” to life. To solve the
issue the court had to determine when the
fetus was a “human”
Said in the 1st 3 months a fetus was not a
“human” so abortion was legal.
Last 3 month a fetus was human and so
abortion is illegal
Middle 3 months left to the states to decide.
United States v. Nixon (1974)
During the 1972 election. People associated
with the campaign to reelect Nixon were
caught breaking into the democratic national
headquarters.
Many believe that the White House had
planned and covered up the break in.
A special senate committee and a special
prosecutor were given the power to
investigate.
United States v. Nixon (1974)
They subpoenaed the president for copies of
his taped phone conversations.
He refused citing executive privilege.
United States v. Nixon (1974)
Constitutional Issue
Can the president use executive privilege to
protect the nation and to also protect himself
in a criminal investigation?
United States v. Nixon (1974)
Supreme Court Decision
Court ruled that the president must turn over
the tapes.
Said that the president can’t use executive
privilege in a criminal case.
Court put in safeguards to protect national
security.
Nixon turned over the tapes and resigned
from the presidency 4 days later.
Abington School District vs.
Schempp (1963)
Schempp was in many ways a repeat of
Engel
The Schempp case concerned a 1949
Pennsylvania law that forced public
schools to start each day with a reading
of ten Bible verses.
The father, Edward L. Schempp,
testified that he objected to parts of the
Bible.
Abington School District vs.
Schempp (1963) S.C. Decision
The Court stood by the Engel decision.
In an 8-1 decision, it ruled that both
Bible reading and the Lord's Prayer
violated the Establishment Clause.
Wallace vs. Jaffree (1985)
At issue here was an Alabama law requiring
that each school day begin with a one minute
period of "silent meditation or voluntary
prayer" (the original 1978 law read only "silent
meditation," but the words "or voluntary
prayer" were added in 1981).
A student's parent sued alleging that this law
violated the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment because it forced students to
pray and basically exposed them to religious
indoctrination.
Wallace vs. Jaffree (1985)
Supreme Court Decision
the Court decided 6-3 that the Alabama
law providing for a moment of silence
was unconstitutional.
They decided this because the moment
was trying to bring prayer back into
schools.