-
Marbury v. Madison
Wiliam Marbury was appointed a Supreme Court Justice and then Thomas Jefferson who became President after the documents were released told the Secretary of State to get rid of the document because it wasn't sent at the same time as the others. The decision was a unanimous 4-0 because Marbury had the right to his commission but Madison didn't have to deliver it. After this case, the Congress is not able to change the original Supreme Court. -
McCulloch v. Maryland
McCulloch refused a bank tax as the owner of one since the Congress passed a law that required all banks not chartered by legislature. The decision was in favor McCulloch because the court decided that Congress could not create a bank. It changed how Congress can use taxes. -
Dred Scott v. Sandford
Although he was freed as a slave, Scott was forced to live as a slave even in the North. The decision was 6-? but the Supreme Court couldn't make him free since he was a citizen of Mississipi where he was a slave. This case shows the state laws versus the federal law. -
Plessy v. Ferguson
Plessy was a man who was a smidget black and was told he could board the white area of the train even though he was mostly white. The decision was in favor of Plessy because the court decided that separate facilities are not equal. -
Korematsu v. U.S.
A Japanese man did not want to go to the Japanese internment camps because he said that it was unconstitutional. The decision was in favor of the US because they were in a state of emergency and the military is allowed to move people when there is danger. This case changed the amount of power the military and Congress have. -
Brown v. Board of Ed Topeka KS
Brown was upset that his African American daughter could not go to a white school a few blocks down tthe street and instead had to walk 14 miles to a rundown black school with railroad track crossing being part of that dangerous path. The decision was in faovr of Brown, forcing school districts to integrate. -
Mapp v. Ohio
A woman had a warrant to search her house and with a failure of finding what they were looking for, the police succeeded in finding something else that they did not have a warrant to find. They incarcerated her for it. The decision was in favor of Mapp because what the polikce did violates personal privacy. This change the power of the police and restricts them from finding things to arrest people for. -
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon was arrested for somethig but he did not have a lawyer. Having to represent himself, he did a horrible job and ended up getting put in a jail for a crime he did not commit. The decision was in favor of Gideon because the courts are supposed to provide you with an attorney since special circumstances can't always be validated. Now, everyone can be appointed an attorney. -
Miranda v. Arizona
A man was arrested and did not have his rights read to him, The court decided in favor of Miranda and the Miranda Rule is now instituted where the police must tell a person their rights before arresting them. -
Tinker v. Des Moines
Children at a school decided to wear armbands to protest something and the school authority had a problem with it. The courts decided in favor of the children, saying that wearing what they want is a form of freedom of expression but that the school can put guidelines in a dress code to permit students from wearing certain things. -
Roe v. Wade
A woman wanted to have an abortion and the court decided that the woman has the right to her own body so she may do as she pleases because the baby does ot have a life until a certain amount of time and therefore does not have rights in this country. Now people can have abortions. -
NJ v. T.L.O.
A student was accused of violating school rules by smoking and the principal searched her purse. They found weed and other evidence that she could be selling it but the girl said that having cigarettes wasnt against the policy, only smoking them. The decision was 6-3 because according to the 4th amendment, she was searched unreasonably. -
Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
A school newspaper was edited without their knowledge. The court decided that the editor had the option to edit things as long as the information is false, slanders people, or reveals identities. This protects the media from releasing information that can be wrong. -
Texas v. Johnson
A man burned a flag and many people were offended. The case was whether or not he was slandering the country by defacing the flag. The decision was in favor of Johnson because it showed an act of betrayal and it raised the concern about what people in the US can do to express themselves.
