Rights of the
Accused
Significance of Case
|
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Police searched Mapp's home looking for a
criminal
and found pornography without having gotten a warrant to search for it.
|
Court ruled the search violated Fourth
Amendment
protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. Applied
Fourth
Amendment protections to actions committed by states.
|
|
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Gideon, an indigent, was charged with a
state felony.
He defended himself and was convicted.
|
Court ruled that states must provide
legal counsel
to all defendants in felony cases.
|
|
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Miranda signed a confession without having
first
been told of his right to speak with an attorney.
|
Court ruled it violated the Fifth
Amendment protection
against self-incrimination. Ruled that all defendants must be
informed
of their rights at the time they are taken into custody.
|
|
Furman v. Georgia (1972)
The constitutionality of Georgia's death
penalty
statute was challenged.
|
Court ruled that Georgia's death penalty
statute
was unconstitutional because the sentence was applied arbitrarily.
The
Court did not rule that the death penalty per se is
unconstitutional.
|
|
Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
Convicted killer Gregg challenged his
death sentence
as cruel and unusual punishment.
|
Court ruled that the death penalty is
not cruel
and unusual punishment.
|
|
McKlesky v. Kemp (1987)
Constitutionality of the death penalty
challenged
on the grounds that black defendants are more likely to be sentenced to
death than white defendants.
|
Court ruled that patterns of
discrimination
are not sufficient grounds to deem the punishment a violation of equal
protection guarantees. Only if discrimination in an individual case
can be proven may the death sentence be overturned on equal protection
grounds.
|
| Roper v. Simmons (2005) At age 17 Simmons kidnapped Shirley Crook and bound her head, hands, and feet with tape and electrical wire. He then pushed her off a bridge into a river where she drowned. After turning 18, he was convicted of 1st degree murder based in part on his confession and was sentenced to death. Death sentence was challenged on the grounds that because he was under 18 at the time of the crime, the sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment. |
Court ruled that based on contemporary standards within the United States and internationally, capital punishment violates 8th Amendment rights preventing cruel and unusual punishment for those between the ages of 15-17. |
Right to
Privacy
Significance of Case
|
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
State law prohibited the use of
contraception by
married couples. Griswold, as director of the Planned Parenthood
chapter,
provided contraception to couples and was prosecuted.
|
Court overturned the law and ruled that
the Bill
of Rights as a whole creates an underlying right, or "zone," of privacy.
|
|
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Jane Roe/Norma McCorvey challenged a Texas
law prohibiting
abortions except when the life of the mother is endangered.
|
Based on the Court's assertion of a right
to privacy
in Griswold, the Court asserted that women have a right to
choose
whether or not to have an abortion during the first three months of
pregnancy without any restrictions from the government.
|
|
Bowers v. Hardwick (1986)
Hardwick, a homosexual, was charged with
violating
GA's sodomy law.
|
Court upheld the constitutionality of the
GA statute
outlawing sodomy on the grounds that the right to privacy does not
extend
to homosexual acts among consenting adults.
|
|
Webster v. Reproductive Health Services
(1989)
Missouri law prohibited the use of
government funds
to pay for abortions in public hospitals and by public employees.
|
Court ruled that Missouri's law was
constitutional
and did not impose an undue burden on a woman's right to privacy.
|
|
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department
of Health
(1990) Nancy Cruzan was left in a permanent vegetative state
after
a car accident. Based on wishes she had expressed to them earlier, her
parents petitioned that the feeding tube that was keeping her alive be
removed and she be allowed to die.
|
Court ruled that treatment may be
terminated,
but only if there is "clear and convincing" evidence to indicate that
is
what the individual wants or would want.
|
|
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
(1992)
Pennsylvania law required a 24-hour
waiting period
before a woman could get an abortion, mandated counseling on
alternatives
to abortion, required a parent's consent before a minor could receive
an
abortion, and husband's consent before a wife could have an abortion.
|
Court reaffirmed the "essential holding"
in Roe
granting women the right to have an abortion, but ruled that states can
impose restrictions on the exercise of that right as long as they do
not
impose an "undue burden" on the exercise of the right. Court
ruled
that only the spousal-notification requirement posed an undue burden.
|
|
Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Texas law made sodomy between homosexuals
(but not
heterosexuals) illegal. Lawrence and his partner, Garner, were
both
convicted of violating the statute.
|
Court ruled that the law violated the
plaintiff’s
right to privacy, and that the state’s interest in protecting the
institution
of marriage and promoting conception and parenthood do not override
this
right to privacy.
|
| Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) Court reversed its essential holding in Sternberg v. Carhart (2000) that a particular form of late term abortion (Dilation & Extraction, a..k.a. intact D & E) can be outlawed as done in the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. "Dilation and extraction (D&X)/intact D & E" is a technique where babies/fetuses are partially delivered before the contents of the skull are vacuumed out and the delivery is completed through vaginal delivery of the dead baby/fetus. Law allows the D & E (dilation and evacuation) option to remain available to physicians, where the baby/fetus is removed in pieces. |
|
Freedom of
Speech
Significance of Case
|
Schenck v. United States (1919)
The Espionage Act made it illegal to
interfere with
military operations. Schenck was convicted for distributing pamphlets
encouraging
people to ignore the draft.
|
Court ruled it violated the First
Amendment; Established
the "clear and present danger" standard that must be met in order to
limit
free speech.
|
|
Gitlow v. New York (1925)
Gitlow was convicted under the NY Criminal
Anarchy
Law of 1902 for distributing literature calling for the overthrow of
the
government.
|
Conviction was upheld, but through
incorporation
of Fourteenth Amendment rights, extended First Amendment protections
from government interference to citizens of individual states.
|
|
Near v. Minnesota (1931)
The state shut down a newspaper for
publishing information
that was offensive to local officials.
|
Court ruled that newspapers are protected
from prior
restraint by the government over what they will publish.
|
|
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)
Sullivan, a public official, sued the Times
for libeling him.
|
Court ruled that the suit was a violation
of freedom
of the press rights and that public officials must meet a higher
standard
of proof than ordinary citizens--"actual malice": knowing and
reckless disregard for the truth--to prove they were libeled by a
publication.
|
|
United States v. O'Brien (1968)
Congress enacted a law making it illegal
to destroy
a draft card. O'Brien burned his to protest the Vietnam War.
|
Court ruled it did not violate free speech
rights
because government has a right to promote interests important to it,
such
as the proper functioning of the Selective Service.
|
|
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
Students were suspended for wearing black
arm bands
to school to protest the Vietnam War.
|
Court ruled their suspension was a
violation of
First Amendment rights to silent expression.
|
|
Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)
Ku Klux Klan member Brandenburg was
arrested for
advocating force through "revenge" against the government because it
did
not do enough to protect the interests of
whites.
|
Court overturned his conviction as a
violation of
his First Amendment rights. Asserted that the government may restrict
speech
only when there is likelihood of imminent lawless action as a
result
of the words that are spoken.
|
|
New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)
The Department of Justice tried to prevent
the Times
from publishing information, known as The Pentagon Papers, about
deceptive
actions taken by the US government during the Vietnam War.
|
Court ruled the government had no right to
deny
the paper's rights to freedom of the press through any "prior
restraints"
on what could be published.
|
|
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Johnson arrested for violating a Texas law
preventing
desecration of the American flag.
|
Court ruled flag burning is a form of
symbolic
speech that can not be infringed by the government.
|
Obscenity
Rulings
Significance of Case
|
Roth v. United States (1957)
Roth was convicted of sending obscene
material through
the mail.
|
Court ruled it was not a violation of
First Amendment
rights because obscenity is not protected under the
First
Amendment. The Court ruled that material is obscene if:
1. it appeals to prurient (lustful)
interests
of average people
2. it violates contemporary standards
3. it is without redeeming qualities
|
|
Miller v. California (1973)
Mass mailings were sent out to advertise
pornography.
|
Court ruled that material is obscene
if:
1. the work as a whole appeals to a
prurient interest
in sex
2. it shows patently offensive sexual acts
that
are prohibited in obscenity laws
3. the work as a whole lacked any serious
literary,
artistic, political or scientific value
States and localities can establish their own standards as to what is acceptable. |
|
New York v. Ferber (1982)
Child pornography was made illegal. Ferber
was arrested
for selling it.
|
Court ruled it did not violate the First
Amendment
because the state has an interest in protecting children.
|
|
Reno v. ACLU (1997)
The Communications Decency Act of 1996
made it a
federal crime to make available via the Internet obscene material to
anyone
under 18 or to post obscene material that might be seen by anyone under
18.
|
Court ruled it was a violation of First
Amendment
rights to free expression because it was "an unnecessarily broad
suppression
of speech addressed to adults."
|
Freedom of
Religion
Significance of Case
|
Engel v. Vitale (1962)
Challenged compulsory reading in
school of a
prayer written by the Board of Regents.
|
Court ruled the reading of the prayer violated
the establishment clause.
|
|
School District of Abington Township,
Pennsylvania
v. Schempp (1963)
Required the reading of Bible verses
in classes.
|
Court ruled it violated the
establishment clause.
|
|
Murrayv. Carlett (1963)
Companion case to PA v. Schempp
|
Court ruled it violated the
establishment clause.
Teaching of religion must serve a secular purpose eg: religious
development
throughout history
|
|
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)
States provided aid to teachers in
religious schools
who taught secular subjects.
|
Ruled aid to church-related schools
must:
1. have a secular purpose
2. neither advance nor inhibit religion
3. not encourage excessive government
entanglement
with religion--Court ruled it did so in this case.
|
| Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) Amish parents fined for refusing to send their children to school beyond the 8th grade as state law mandated. |
Court ruled mandatory education violated the family's religious beliefs. |
|
Hobbie v. Unemployment Appeals
Commission of
FL (1987) Seventh Day Adventist was fired from her job because she
would not work on the Sabbath; denied unemployment benefits because
refusing
to work was "misconduct."
|
Court ruled it violated the free exercise
clause
because it burdened her religion by forcing her to either go against
religion
or give up benefits.
|
|
Santa Fe School District v. Doe
(2000)
Votes were held by students to determine
1) if prayers
would be conducted at football games and 2) if so, which student would
deliver the prayer.
|
Court ruled that because the prayer was
delivered
over the intercom in the football stadium, all students were forced to
listen to it, whether or not they wanted to. Court ruled this violated
the establishment clause.
|
| Van Orden v. Perry/McCreary County v. ACLU (2005) Texas incorporated the 10 Commandments in a display of other monuments on the grounds of the state capitol. McCreary Co., Kentucky incorporated the 10 Commandments in a display inside the county courthouse. |
Court ruled that displays of the 10 Commandments are not unconstitutional unless they are from a predominately religious (KY) as opposed to a predominately historical perspective (TX). |