-
Marbury v. Madison
Q:Should the Court issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Secretary of State to deliver commissions to Marbury and the others who had been denied?
Decision:Marbury would not get the job as a justice.
Short term effect:Marbury would not get the commission.
Long term effect:The case created the power of judicial review.
V:liberty -
Worcester v. Georgia
Q: Could Georgia be able to regulate the relations between its state and the members of the Cherokee nation?
Ruling: It was unconstitutional for Georgia to be conflicting with members of another nation, since they are seaparte.
short term effect: Worcester does not need a license to be on Cherokke territory.
long term effect: States cannot interfere with any other territory.
v: authority, freedom -
Dred Scott v. Sandford
Q: Does residence in a free territory make Scott a free man?
ruling: No, it does not. According to Article III, no slave can be a citizen.
short term effect: Scott did not become a free man.
long term effect: Missouri Compromise declared unconstitutional
v: freedom -
Miranda v. Arizona
Q: Does interrogation violate the suspect's fifth Amendment rights?
ruling: Yes, it does. The suspect has the right to remain silent without a lawyer.
short term effect: Miranda's interrogation process was unfair for him.
long term effect: The police need to state what the suspect's rights are to them before interrogation.
v: authority -
Tinker v. Des Moines
Q: Does the denial of wearing headbands in order to protest for peace against the Vietnam War go against the students first Amendment rights?
Ruling: The school violated the students' first Amendment rights. The students have the right to freedom of speech.
short term effect: The students do not have to be penalized.
long term effect: Students have the right to protest and are free to express their beliefs.
v: freedom and equality -
Bethel High School v. Fraiser
Q: Does the school have the right to prohibit use of innapropriate language?
Ruling: The school does have the right to prohibit the use of innapropriate language. The first Amendment does not prevent the school from doing this.
short term effect: Fraser reveives suspension.
long term effect: Schools in the future have the right to deny use of vulgar language.
v: freedom -
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
Q: Did the principal violate the students' freedom to press?
Ruling: No, the principal was allowed to stop the publication of the innapropriate articles from the students.
short term effect: The two innapropriate articles will not be published until changed.
long term effect: Educators have the right to have high standards for the speech of students.
v: freedom and equality -
Morse v. Frederick
Q:Does the school's action on the sign violate the student's first Amendment freedom of speech rights at a school supervised event? Does the school have the ability to discipline a student by suspending him?
Ruling:Frederick didn't have the right to promote illegal drugs. Also, a school official has the right to prohibit any vulgar language.
STE:Frederick deserved his suspension.
LTE:Any vulgar or innapropriate language in school sponsored events.
v: authority, equality, and freedom. -
Riley v. California
Q: Did the police violate Riley's fourth Amendment rights from unreasonable search and seizures without a warrant?
Ruling: Yes. The police violated Riley's fourth Amendment rights by going through private information on his phone.
short term effect: Riley's phone cannot be testified against himself.
long term effect: Searching through DIGITAL and private information is Unconstitutional.
v: equality
