The Judicial System Landmark Cases

Document Sample
The Judicial System Landmark Cases Powered By Docstoc
					The Judicial System
Landmark Cases
Chapter 16
Pages 386-408
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
   The establishment of
    Judicial Review.

   “It is emphatically the
    province and duty of the
    judicial department to say
    what the law is. Those who
    apply the rule to particular
    cases, must of necessity
    expound and interpret that
    rule. If two laws conflict
    with each other, the courts
    must decide on the
    operation of each.”
           Chief Justice John Marshall
Thomas Jefferson, a member of the Republican Party, won the
   election of 1800. The outgoing President, John Adams,
   proceeded to rapidly appoint 58 members of his own party to
   fill the government posts created by Congress.
It was the responsibility of the Secretary of State, John Marshall,
   to “deliver the commissions,” finish the paperwork, and give it
   to each of the newly appointed judges. Although Marshall
   signed and sealed all of the commissions, he failed to deliver
   17 of them to the respective appointees. Marshall assumed
   that his successor would finish the job, but when Jefferson
   became President, he told his new Secretary of State, James
   Madison, not to deliver some of the commissions, because he
   did not want members of the opposing political party to take
   office. Those individuals couldn’t take office until they actually
   had their commissions in hand.
William Marbury, whom Adams had appointed as
 justice of the peace of the District of Columbia, was
 one of these last-minute appointees who did not
 receive his commission. Marbury sued James
 Madison and asked the Supreme Court of the United
 States to issue a writ of mandamus, a court order that
 would require Madison to deliver the commissions,
 appointing the judges.
Marbury argued that he was entitled to his commission
 and that the Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the Supreme
 Court of the United States original jurisdiction to
 issue a writ of mandamus. Madison disagreed. When
 the case came before the Court, John Marshall—the
 person who had failed to deliver the commissions in
 the first place—was the new Chief Justice.
What was to be decided?
1.   Does the applicant have a right to the
     commission that he demands?

2.   If he does have a right, then how does
     the laws of this country afford him a

3.   If a remedy is needed, is a writ of
     mandamus the remedy for this situation?
The Dilemma
   How would the decision be enforced?
    ◦ Marshall knew that President Jefferson would
      ignore an order to put Marbury in the seat.
      The Constitution states that it is the President’s job to
       enforce court’s decision, so what happens when the
       President says no?

    ◦ Marshall also knew that this situation could take
      away power from the court’s and upset the
      balance of power.
      If the court’s rulings are not enforced, then the delicate
       balance of power between the three branches is lost
       and the courts are weakened. So, what decision will
       provide for justice and protect the court’s power?
The solution
   The court ruled that the appointment
    was valid and should go to Marbury,
    ◦ The Judiciary Act of 1789 changed the
      Constitution by giving the Courts powers not
      found in the Constitution, which since the
      Constitution can only be changed by an
      Amendment the Judiciary Act of 1789 was
What did this do?
   The Supreme Court did not decide
    Marbury’s case, he had to sue in lower
    courts and never did receive his commission.
   Congress had to change the Judicial Act of
   Supreme Court now had the power of
    “Judicial Review” and it was accepted and
    enforced by the President.
    ◦ The power struggle was over and the Judicial
      Branch was accepted as an equal branch.
Questions for discussion
1.   Is this too much power for the Federal
     Courts, considering that judges are
     appointed for life?

2.   What happens if a court decision is not
     enforced by the President?

3.   Why have we not had an issue of a
     major power struggle?
    McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
   Establishment that “necessary and
    proper clause” of Congress is above
    state’s powers.

    “…Although, among the enumerated
    powers of government, we do not find
    the word “bank” or “incorporation,” we
    find the great powers to lay and collect
    taxes; to borrow money; to regulate
    commerce; to declare and conduct a
    war; and to raise and support armies
    and navies…But it may with great
    reason be contended, that a
    government, entrusted with ample
    means for their execution. The power
    being given, it is the interest of the
    nation to facilitate its execution…”
                   -Chief Justice John Marshall
In 1791, the first Bank of the United States was established to serve as a
   central bank for the country. It was a place for storing government
   funds, collecting taxes, and issuing sound currency. At the time it was
   created, the government was in its infancy and there was a great deal
   of debate over exactly how much power the nation government
   should have. Some people, such as Alexander Hamilton, argued for the
   supremacy of the national government and a loose interpretation of its
   powers, which would include the ability to establish a bank. Others,
   such as Thomas Jefferson, advocated states’ rights, limited government,
   and a stricter interpretation of the national government’s powers
   under the Constitution and, therefore, no bank. While Jefferson was
   President, the Bank’s charter was not renewed. After the War of 1812,
   President James Madison determined that the country could utilize the
   services of a national bank to help fulfill its powers listed in link to
   Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution. In response to his
   suggestion, Congress proposed a Second Bank of the United States in
President Madison approved the charter and branches
  were established throughout the United States. Many
  states opposed opening branches of this bank within
  their boundaries for several reason.

    1.   The Bank of the United States Competed with their own Banks

    2.   States found many of the managers of the Bank of the United
         States to be corrupt

    3.   States felt that the federal government was exerting too much
         power over them by attempting to curtail the state practice of
         issuing more paper money than they were able to redeem on
One state opposed to the Bank of the United States was Maryland. In an
  attempt to drive the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the United States
  out of business, the Maryland State Legislature required that all banks
  chartered outside of Maryland pay an annual tax of $15,000. There was
  a $500 penalty for each violation of this statute. James McCulloch,
  cashier of the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the United States,
  refused to pay the tax.

Maryland took him to court, arguing that because Maryland was a
  sovereign state, it had the authority to tax businesses within its border,
  and that because the Bank of the United States was one such business,
  it had to pay the tax. The attorneys for Maryland reasoned that
  because the federal government had the authority to regulate state
  banks, Maryland could do the same to federal banks. Besides, they
  argued, the Constitution does not give Congress the power to establish
  a Bank of the United States. McCulloch was convicted by a Maryland
  court of violating the tax law and was fined $2,500.
McCulloch appealed the decision to the Maryland Court of
 Appeals. His attorneys asserted that the establishment of a
 national bank was a “necessary and proper” function of the
 Congress. They stated that many powers of the
 government are implied rather than specifically stated in the
 Constitution. Furthermore, Maryland did not have the
 authority to levy the tax, because doing so interfered with
 the workings of the federal government.

After the Maryland Court of Appeals upheld the original
  decision against McCulloch, he appealed again. The case
  was heard by the Supreme Court of the United States,
  headed by Chief Justice John Marshall
What was to be decided?
1.   Does Congress have the power to
     incorporate a bank?

2.   Does a state have any power (in this
     case to tax) over any aspect of the
     federal government?
     What was the decision?
1.   Under the “Necessary and Proper Clause”
     Congress has the power to take any and all
     actions necessary, including establishing a
     bank, to fulfill the job of the Government.

2.   Under the “Supremacy Clause” State
     government do not have any power over
     the federal government, it is very clear they
     are under the power of the federal
Questions still debated….
1.       Is there a limit to what could be
         considered “necessary and proper”?

2.       What is the impact of the “supremacy
         clause” on the future of America?
     ◦       Should the federal government always have
             Abortion, gay marriage, drinking laws, etc.
    Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
"The object of the [Fourteenth]
   Amendment was undoubtedly to
   enforce the absolute equality of the two
   races before the law, but in the nature of
   things it could not have been intended
   to abolish distinctions based upon color,
   or to enforce social, as distinguished
   from political, equality, or a commingling
   of the two races upon terms
   unsatisfactory to either.“
         -Justice Henry Billings Brown
In 1890, Louisiana passed a statute called the Separate Car Act, which stated "that all
   railway companies carrying passengers in their coaches in this state, shall provide
   equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored races, by providing
   two or more passenger coaches for each passenger train, or by dividing the
   passenger coaches by a partition so as to secure separate accommodations. . . . "
   The penalty for sitting in the wrong compartment was a fine of $25 or 20 days in
The Plessy case was carefully orchestrated by both the Citizens' Committee to Test
  the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Act, a group of blacks who raised $3000
  to challenge the Act, and the East Louisiana Railroad Company, which sought to
  terminate the Act largely for monetary reasons. They chose a 30-year-old
  shoemaker named Homer Plessy, a citizen of the United States who was one-
  eighth black and a resident of the state of Louisiana. On June 7, 1892, Plessy
  purchased a first-class passage from New Orleans to Covington, Louisiana and sat
  in the railroad car designated for whites only. The railroad officials, following
  through on the arrangement, arrested Plessy and charged him with violating the
  Separate Car Act. Well known advocate for black rights Albion Tourgee, a white
  lawyer, agreed to argue the case without compensation.
In the criminal district court for the parish of Orleans, Plessy argued that the
    Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the

Thirteenth Amendment
  Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for
  crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the
  United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Fourteenth Amendment
  Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the
  jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they
  reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges
  or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any
  person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
  person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
John Howard Ferguson was the judge presiding over Plessy's criminal case in
   the district court. He had previously declared the Separate Car Act
   "unconstitutional on trains that traveled through several states." However,
   in Plessy's case he decided that the state could choose to regulate
   railroad companies that operated solely within the state of Louisiana.
   Therefore, Ferguson found Plessy guilty and declared the Separate Car
   Act constitutional.

Plessy appealed the case to the Louisiana State Supreme Court, which
   affirmed the decision that the Louisiana law as constitutional. Plessy
   petitioned for a writ of error from the Supreme Court of the United
   States. Judge John Howard Ferguson was named in the case brought
   before the United States Supreme Court (Plessy v. Ferguson) because he
   had been named in the petition to the Louisiana Supreme Court and not
   because he was a party to the initial lawsuit.
  What was to be decided?
Are separate, but equal facilities allowed under
 the 13th and 14th Amendment or are
 separate facilities unconstitutional?

What is the government’s role in dealing with
 racial prejudice?
   What was decided?
7-1 decision

The 13th Amendment did not apply to this case
 according to the court. The 14th Amendment was
 only concerned with the legal, not social, equality.

The courts said the law did not impact racial equality,
 so as long as the separation was equal and fair, it
 was up to the states. In this case Louisiana was
 keeping peace and good order.
  What was decided?
The majority believed that the government had no
 power to do anything about “social equality.” They
 stated “if one race be inferior to the other socially,
 the Constitution cannot put them upon the same

The sole dissenting judge felt that these laws were
 based on the wrong belief that “colored citizens
 are so inferior…” and because of this the laws
 should be struck down because the government
 cannot contribute to the seeds of hate.
  Questions still debated
What is the long term impact this ruling had on American
  society? What issues do we still see today because of this
Stats: Blacks are
       -twice as likely to be unemployed
       -three times as likely to live in poverty
       -six times as likely to be imprisoned
       -80% graduate high school (90% whites)
       -17% have bachelor’s degree (30% whites)
       -55% rent (35% whites)
How much of this is because of Plessy v. Ferguson?
What do we do about it now?
Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
"We conclude that the
  doctrine of 'separate but
  equal' has no place.
  Separate educational
  facilities are inherently
       —Chief Justice Earl Warren
In the early 1950s, Linda Brown was a young African
   American student in the Topeka, Kansas school district.
   Every day she and her sister, Terry Lynn, had to walk
   through the Rock Island Railroad Switchyard to get to
   the bus stop for the ride to the all-black Monroe
   School. Linda Brown tried to gain admission to the
   Sumner School, which was closer to her house, but her
   application was denied by the Board of Education of
   Topeka because of her race. The Sumner School was for
   white children only.
Under the laws of the time, many public facilities were segregated by race.
  The precedent-setting Plessy v. Ferguson case, which was decided by the
  Supreme Court of the United States in 1896, allowed for such
  segregation. In that case, a black man, Homer Plessy, challenged a
  Louisiana law that required railroad companies to provide equal, but
  separate, accommodations for the white and African American races.
  He claimed that the Louisiana law violated the Fourteenth Amendment,
  which demands that states provide "equal protection of the laws."
  However, the Supreme Court of the United States held that as long as
  segregated facilities were qualitatively equal, segregation did not violate
  the Fourteenth Amendment. In doing so, the Court classified
  segregation as a matter of social equality, out of the control of the
  justice system concerned with maintaining legal equality.The Court
  stated, "If one race be inferior to the other socially, the constitution of
  the United States cannot put them on the same plane."
At the time of the Brown case, a Kansas statute permitted, but did not
  require, cities of more than 15,000 people to maintain separate school
  facilities for black and white students. On that basis, the Board of
  Education of Topeka elected to establish segregated elementary schools.
  Other public schools in the community were operated on a
  nonsegregated, or unitary, basis.

At the time of the Brown case, a Kansas statute permitted, but did not
  require, cities of more than 15,000 people to maintain separate school
  facilities for black and white students. On that basis, the Board of
  Education of Topeka elected to establish segregated elementary schools.
  Other public schools in the community were operated on a
  nonsegregated, or unitary, basis.
The Browns felt that the decision of the Board violated the Constitution.
  They sued the Board of Education of Topeka, alleging that the
  segregated school system deprived Linda Brown of the equal
  protection of the laws required under the Fourteenth Amendment.

No State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the
 equal protection of the laws.
 —Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the
 U.S. Constitution

Thurgood Marshall, an attorney for the National Association for the
  Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), argued the Brown's case.
  Marshall would later become a Supreme Court justice.
The three-judge federal district court found that segregation in public
  education had a detrimental effect upon black children, but the court
  denied that there was any violation of Brown's rights because of the
  "separate but equal" doctrine established in the Supreme Court's 1896
  Plessy decision. The court found that the schools were substantially
  equal with respect to buildings, transportation, curricula, and
  educational qualifications of teachers. The Browns appealed their case
  to the Supreme Court of the United States, claiming that the segregated
  schools were not equal and could never be made equal. The Court
  combined the case with several similar cases from South Carolina,
  Virginia, and Delaware. The ruling in the Brown v. Board of Education case
  came in 1954.
What was to be decided?
Does “Separate, but equal” really create an
 equal situation?
    If not, then what has it really created?

Can we have a segregated society?
  What was the decision?
The courts focused on the effects of a
 separate education on the individual children.
 They found that even when the facilities
 were the same, the black students had an
 overall sense of being inferior to the white
 students. They decided to study the affect
 of this inferiority complex. They found that it
 significantly and permanently damaged these
 students and limited their success for the
 rest of their life.
  What was the decision?
In a unanimous decision:
  The court found that education was too important
  to be limiting any students and their future. They
  ruled that “separate, was inherently unequal” and
  that this system was discriminating against black
  people. All schools were to desegregate and allow
  ALL students, regardless of ethnicity, into the

This was one of the early cases that started the Civil
 Rights movement.
   Questions still debated?
What was the long lasting effect of segregation?

Do we do anything about “natural

Is education equal today or do some children
  (students in wealthier areas) receive better
  education? If so, what can be done about it?
      Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
". . . the prosecution may not use
     statements, whether exculpatory or
     inculpatory, stemming from custodial
     interrogation of the defendant unless
     it demonstrates the use of
     procedural safeguards effective to
     secure the privilege against self-

        —Chief Justice Earl Warren
        speaking for the majority
Ernesto Miranda was a poor Mexican immigrant living in Phoenix, Arizona,
  in 1963. Miranda was arrested after a crime victim identified him in a
  police lineup. Miranda was charged with rape and kidnapping and
  interrogated for two hours while in police custody. The police officers
  questioning him did not inform him of his Fifth Amendment right against
  self-incrimination, or of his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of
  an attorney.

As a result of the interrogation, he confessed in writing to the crimes with
  which he was charged. His written statement also included an
  acknowledgement that he was aware of his right against self-
  incrimination. During his trial, the prosecution used his confession to
  obtain a conviction, and he was sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison
  on each count.
Miranda's defense attorney appealed to the Arizona
  Supreme Court. His attorney argued that his confession
  should have been excluded from trial because he had
  not been informed of his rights, nor had an attorney
  been present during his interrogation. The police
  officers involved admitted that they had not given
  Miranda any explanation of his rights. They argued,
  however, that because Miranda had been convicted of a
  crime in the past, he must have been aware of his rights.
  The Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal and
  upheld his conviction.
The case comes down to this fundamental question: What is the role of the
  police in protecting the rights of the accused, as guaranteed by the Fifth
  and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution? The Fifth Amendment states
  that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness
  against himself. . . ." The Sixth Amendment states that, "In all criminal
  prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to have the assistance of
  counsel for his defense." The Supreme Court of the United States had
  made previous attempts to deal with these issues. In Brown v. Mississippi
  (1936), the Court had ruled that the Fifth Amendment protected
  individuals from being forced to confess. In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the
  Court held that persons accused of felonies have a fundamental right to an
  attorney, even if they cannot afford one. In 1964, after Miranda's arrest, the
  Court ruled that when an accused person is denied the right to consult
  with his attorney, his or her Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated
  (Escobedo v. Illinois). But do the police have an obligation to ensure that the
  accused person is aware of these rights? If so, at what point in the criminal
  justice process must the defendant learn of these rights?
In 1965, the Supreme Court of the United States
  agreed to hear Miranda's case. At the same time,
  the Court agreed to hear three similar cases,
  Vignera v. New York, Westover v. United States, and
  California v. Stewart. The Court combined the four
  cases. Since Miranda was listed first among the four
  cases considered by the Court, the decision came
  to be known by that name. The decision in Miranda
  v. Arizona was handed down in 1966.
  What is to be decided?
What role do police have in protecting the rights of
 the accused that are guaranteed in the bill of
     -Do police have to make sure that the
     accused are aware of all their rights?
            -If so, when do police have to
     notify the accused of their rights?

If “”innocent until proven guilty,” how much
   responsibility does the system have to ensure this?
    What was decided?
5-4 decision

The Constitution guarantees rights to the accused in the Bill of
  Rights, additionally a person is always innocent until proven
  guilty. These rights must be protected by our government, in
  this case the police are representing our govenrment.

The arrested had to be notified of their rights before any
  chance that they could violate those rights.
      -The issue was that it was too easy for police to cross
      the line without a clear limit to ensure their rights.
 Miranda rights
These have to be read before any questioning or at
 the time of arrest.

-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
   before any questioning
-If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be
   appointed to represent you before any questioning
-Do you understand these rights?
    Questions still debated?
   Do the “Miranda Rights” limit police officer
    from being able to catch criminals and allow
    guilty criminals to go free?
    ◦ If so, do we want these limits?

   How much responsibility do we have as
    citizens to know our rights?
    ◦ Does the government need to protect us?
     Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
   Established students rights
    to protest.

   “…In the absence of a
    specific showing of
    constitutionally valid
    reasons to regulate their
    speech, students are
    entitled to freedom of
    expression of their views.”
John and Mary Beth Tinker were public school students in Des Moines,
   Iowa in December of 1965. As part of a group against American
   involvement in the Vietnam War, they decided to publicize their
   opposition by wearing black armbands to school. Having heard of the
   students' plans, the principals of the public schools in Des Moines
   adopted and informed students of a new policy concerning armbands.
   This policy stated that any student who wore an armband to school
   would be asked immediately to remove it. A student who refused to
   take off his or her armband would be suspended until agreeing to return
   to school without the band

Two days later and aware of the school policy, the Tinker children and a
  friend decided to wear armbands to school. Upon arriving at school, the
  children were asked to remove their armbands. They did not remove the
  armbands and were subsequently suspended until they returned to
  school without their armbands.
The children returned to school without armbands after
  January 1, 1966, the date scheduled for the end of their
  protest. However, their fathers filed suit in U.S. District
  Court. This suit asked the court for a small amount of
  money for damages and an injunction to restrain school
  officials from enforcing their armband policy. Although the
  District Court recognized the children's First Amendment
  right to free speech, the court refused to issue an injunction,
  claiming that the school officials' actions were reasonable in
  light of potential disruptions from the students' protest. The
  Tinkers appealed their case to the U.S. Court of Appeals but
  were disappointed when a tie vote in that court allowed the
  District Court's ruling stand. As a result they decided to
  appeal the case to the Supreme Court of the United States.
The case came down to this fundamental question: Do the
  First Amendment rights of free speech extend to symbolic
  speech by students in public schools? And, if so, in what
  circumstances is that symbolic speech protected? The First
  Amendment states "Congress shall make no law . . .
  abridging the freedom of speech." The Fourteenth
  Amendment extends this rule to state governments as well,
  of which school systems are a part. The First Amendment,
  however, does not identify which kinds of speech are
  protected. For example, it is not clear whether hate speech
  against an individual or group is protected. Neither does the
  First Amendment specify what types of expressive actions
  should be considered as speech.
The Supreme Court of the United States has made many attempts to
  determine what types of symbolic speech are protected under the First
  Amendment. In 1919, the Court decided in Schenck v. United States that
  the right of an individual to protest World War I by distributing
  pamphlets urging draftee non-compliance was unconstitutional because
  the distribution "create[ed] a clear and present danger that . . . will bring
  about . . . substantive evils." The Court wrestled with the issue of the
  right to symbolic speech again in the case of Thornhill v. Alabama (1940)
  when the Court ruled that picketing was a form of symbolic speech
  protected by the First Amendment because no clear and present danger
  of destruction of life or property or of breach of the peace was inherent
  in the action. Three years later in West Virginia v. Barnette (1943), the
  Court extended the First Amendment protection of symbolic speech to
  students in public schools. In Barnette, the Court held "[i]f there is any
  fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or
  petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism,
  religion, or other matters of opinion. . . ."
In 1968 the Supreme Court of the United
  States agreed to hear Tinker's case and
  consider the constitutionality of the Des
  Moines principals' anti-armband policy.
  The Court's decision in Tinker v. Des
  Moines was handed down in 1969.
What was to be decided?
   Does the First amendment right of free
    speech extend to symbolic speech by
    students in public schools?
      If so, then what exactly is protected?

    ◦ How do we protect the “authority” structure
      of public schools so that they can stop
      disruptive behavior?
      If the purpose of school is learning, then schools
       must be able to stop all possible distractions..right?
    What was the decision?
 It was a split decision.
 Students and teachers are protected under the
  First Amendment, as all people are, but…
    ◦ The school does have the authority to stop/punish
      disruptive speech/behavior if it has no real purpose.
 Schools cannot pick and choose sides of issues to
  stop, it is an all or nothing approach.
 The goals of public school is to educate, any action
  that would interfere with education can be
     Questions still debated…
   Is there a line of freedom of speech in the
    ◦ Both by teachers and students

   Is something disruptive just because it is an
    unpopular opinion?

   How far can students go to express
    themselves if they feel that there is a
    purpose to what they are expressing
Roe v. Wade (1973)
   Sets the standards for

   “We … acknowledge our
    awareness of the sensitive and
    emotional nature of the
    abortion controversy, of the
    vigorous opposing views, even
    among physicians, and of the
    deep and seemingly absolute
    convictions that the subject
          -Justice Blackmum
               Majority Opinion
In the latter part of the nineteenth century and the first half of the
   twentieth century, most states adopted laws strictly regulating the
   availability of abortions. Many states outlawed abortion except in
   cases where the mother’s life was in jeopardy. Illegal abortions
   were widespread and often dangerous for women who undertook
   them because they were performed in unsanitary conditions.

The sexual revolution that began in the second half of the twentieth
  century resulted in public pressure to ease abortion laws. As some
  states began to relax abortion restrictions, some women found it
  relatively easy to travel to a state where the laws were less
  restrictive or where a doctor was willing to certify medical
However, poor women often could not travel outside their state to
  receive treatment, raising questions of equality. Statutes were often
  vague, so that doctors did not really know whether they were
  committing a felony by providing an abortion. In addition,
  government interference in sexual matters was beginning to be
  called into question by a changing conception of privacy.

There is no right to privacy explicitly guaranteed in the
  Constitution. However, the Supreme Court has long acknowledged
  some right to privacy. In earlier rulings about privacy, the Supreme
  Court seemed to connect the right to privacy to location, with a
  particular emphasis on a person’s home. This association stemmed
  from notions of property rights and centered on people’s personal
However, in the second half of the last century, the Court’s position
  on privacy came to be seen as a right connected to a person, not
  to a location. The change in conceptions of privacy can be seen
  clearly in the landmark decision of Griswold v. Connecticut
  (1965). The Supreme Court ruled that a Connecticut statute
  outlawing access to contraception violated the U.S. Constitution
  because it invaded the privacy of married couples to make
  decisions about their families. In that ruling, the Court identified
  privacy as a transcendent value, fundamental to the American way
  of life, and to the other basic rights outlined in the Bill of
  Rights. Though the decision focused on the fundamental nature of
  privacy associated with marriage, the case set the stage for the
  Court to proceed further in its protection. Seven years later, the
  Court decided a case that extended access to contraception to
  unmarried persons, as well.
While the word privacy does not appear in the Constitution, the
 argument for protecting privacy is based on the Due Process
 Clause of the 14th Amendment. That clause has been found to
 protect certain fundamental rights against government action.

Jane Roe, a pseudonym used to protect her identity, was an unmarried
   and pregnant Texas resident in 1970. She wanted to have an
   abortion, but Texas abortion law made it a felony to abort a fetus
   unless “on medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the
   mother.” Roe filed suit against Wade, the district attorney of Dallas
   County,Texas to challenge the statute outlawing abortion.
Roe contested the statute on the grounds that it violated the
  Fourteenth Amendment mandating equal protection of the laws
  and the guarantee of personal liberty, and a mother’s right to
  privacy implicitly guaranteed in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and
  Fourteenth Amendments. The state argued that “the right to life of
  the unborn child is superior to the right to privacy of the
  mother.” The state also argued that in previous decisions where
  the Court protected individual or marital privacy, that right was not
  absolute. The state argued that this is a policy matter best left to
  the legislature to decide. A three-judge federal district court ruled
  the Texas abortion law unconstitutional, and the case was then
  appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.
What was to be decided?
   The Texas anti-abortion law had been ruled
    unconstitutional by the lower courts, so it was the state
    of Texas appealing the decision.

   Does the state legislature have the right to regulate
    abortion policies?

   How much of a right to “privacy” does a pregnant
    women have to her body?
     What was the decision?
   9th Amendment, all rights not found in the constitution are
    reserved to the people and states accordingly, comes to
    ◦ This is an issue that is reserved to both the people and the states.
    ◦ It is a right to privacy issue under the 4th Amendment to a point.
    ◦ It is a state’s responsibility to protect life (state’s interest) to a point.
   The key aspect of the ruling is a balance of the respective
    interests of both the individuals and the state.
    ◦ First trimester abortion is the decision of the pregnant woman and
      her physician, not to be regulated by the state.
    ◦ Second trimester abortion can be regulated (not illegal) to promote
      the health of the mother and reasonable to maternal health.
    ◦ Third trimester abortion can be made illegal by the state, with the
      exception of the mother’s life being in jeopardy without an abortion.
    Issues still today
   Pro-Life v. Pro-Choice still heavily argued today.

   Anti-abortion extremist violence against doctors.

   States like North and South Dakota are trying to
    pass laws against abortions to challenge the ruling.

   Should any health insurance be used to pay for
The Death Penalty
Several cases have made it to the U.S.
  Supreme Court to deal with the use and
  implementation of the death punishment.

The main issue deals with the 8th
 Amendment and what qualifies as cruel
 and unusual punishment.
    Supreme Court Cases
   Furman v. Georgia (1972)
    ◦ Said that death penalty was cruel and unusual
      punishment that violated Constitutional rights
      when states are not consistent in the application
      of it. In several states, minorities were getting
      the death penalty for the same crimes that
      whites were getting life.
   This caused a temporary halt in executions
    while the states tried to figure out how and
    if they could use the death penalty
Supreme Court Cases
   Gregg v. Georgia (1977)
    ◦ This case started the executions back again.
    ◦ The ruling was that as long as it was applied
      fairly and consistently, the death penalty was a
      reasonable punishment.
   Coker v. Georgia (1977)
    ◦ Ruled that the death penalty is an excessive
      penalty for rape.
Supreme Court Cases
   Atkins v.Virginia (2002)
    ◦ Ruled that the death penalty can not be used
      for people that are mentally retarded.
   Ring v. Arizona (2002)
    ◦ A judge changed a juries life sentence decision
      to the death penalty. The Supreme Court said
      that the only way a sentence can be changed
      to the death penalty is by a jury or by the
      request of the defendant.
Supreme Court Cases
   Roper v. Simmons (2005)
    ◦ This decision ruled that the death penalty
      cannot be applied to people who were under
      the age of 18 when the crime was committed.
    Pro Death Penalty
   Proponents of capital punishment say it is an important tool
    for preserving law and order and that the death penalty
    deters additional crime thereby saving innocent lives.

   They argue that the death penalty costs less than life
    imprisonment because it prevents needing to house and
    feed the criminal for so many years and that life - even in
    prison - is a privilege that some people should not have.

   They believe that retribution or "an eye for an eye" is often
    the most appropriate action because some crimes are so
    horrible and some criminals so callous that execution is the
    only way to prevent future tragedy.
      Con Death Penalty
   Opponents of capital punishment say it has no deterrent effect
    on crime and wrongly gives governments the power to take
    human life making them no better than the murderers they

   They argue that serving a lifetime jail sentence is a worse
    punishment than death, and that life imprisonment costs less
    than capital punishment because death penalty cases are
    expensive to prosecute and usually result in numerous appeals.

   They believe the death penalty perpetuates social injustices
    by disproportionately targeting people of color (racist) and
    people who cannot afford good attorneys (classist). They say it
    creates a system whereby innocent people are sometimes
State of Ohio stance on the death
Affirmative Action
   Origins of Affirmative Action
The banning of discrimination in the workplace
 on the basis of race started under President
 Roosevelt in 1941.

This was strengthened by the successive
 presidents into and past the Civil Rights

It becomes clear, that simply banning
  discrimination is not enough
  The problem
Due to the years of discrimination, the
 people that have been discriminated against
 are not qualified to compete with the people
 that were not discriminated against.

So, by ending discrimination, but having only
 the most “qualified” get the job, the
 discrimination continues, even if it is
The question
How do we create a fair system of
 employment opportunity that not only
 eliminates discrimination, but also
 eliminates the after affects of past

For every dollar a white man earns: Asian men
  earn .99$, black men earn .74$, Hispanic men
  .58$, Asian women .78$, White women .73$,
  Black women .63$, and Hispanic women .52$
 The Solution
Affirmative Action
 This is the set of positive steps that
 employers use to promote the equal
 employment opportunity and to eliminate
 discrimination in the workplace.

 This includes racial, gender, and all other
 possible types of discrimination.
  How does it work
Any situation where there are fewer women and/or
  minorities than would be expected based on the available
  workforce, then the employer must look at the situation
  and create a goal to create a diverse workforce.
       Quotas are illegal, but are often used as a complaint
       against Affirmative Action

3-Steps under Affirmative Action
  1. Problem Identification
  2. Self-Analysis
  3. Action-Oriented Programs
 The Cases
Regents of the University of California v.
 Bakke (1978)
     Allowed for “race” to be a positive consideration in
     acceptance to college, but there could not be

Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
     Upheld the Bakke ruling and stated that race could be
     used in acceptance, especially to increase the
     benefits created by a more diverse learning
     environment .
       Issues around Affirmative Action
   Does Affirmative Action conflict with the principles of merit?

   How does Affirmative Action deal the “Glass Ceiling” that is
    currently viewed as an issue in the workplace?

   Is Affirmative Action “reverse discrimination” against white

   Is Affirmative Action hurting minorities by creating a situation
    where they need “special help” to achieve success, not
    allowing them to demonstrate what they can do on their

   When are we past this and can allow people to get what they
    earn, without regard to discrimination?