Process of Incorporation

  • Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago

    Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
    5th Amendment
    The City of Chicago wanted to connect two disjoint sections of Rockwell Street between 18th and 19th Streets, over private property. This property was owned by various individuals but also included a right-of-way owned by the Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Corporation. To accomplish this, the city petitioned in Cook County Circuit Court to have the necessary land condemned. The land was condemned.
  • Gitlow v. New York

    Gitlow v. New York
    First Amendment
    The landmark 1925 case Gitlow v. New York, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment's protection of free speech and press applied to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, a process known as "incorporation¨.
  • Near v. Minnesota

    Near v. Minnesota
    1st Amendment
    In the landmark 1931 case Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court established that prior restraint (government censorship of speech before publication) is unconstitutional, a key principle of freedom of the press protected by the First Amendment
  • DeJonge v. Oregon

    DeJonge v. Oregon
    First Amendment
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause protects freedom of assembly from state statutes, overturning the conviction of Dirk DeJonge, who was prosecuted for assisting in a meeting called by the Communist Party
  • Cantwell v. Connecticut

    Cantwell v. Connecticut
    14th Amendment
    In the landmark 1940 case Cantwell v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment's protections of religious freedom, specifically the free exercise clause, apply to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, a principle known as "incorporation¨.
  • In re Oliver

    In re Oliver
    6th Amendment
    In In re Oliver, a 1948 U.S. Supreme Court case, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment's right to a public trial applies to state criminal proceedings, reversing a Michigan court's decision that found a witness guilty of contempt in a one-man grand jury proceeding without proper notice or opportunity to defend
  • Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing

    Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing
    14th Amendment
    Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) Although the Establishment Clause does require governments to avoid excessive entanglement with religion, it is permissible for a state to reimburse the costs of transportation for students in parochial schools.
  • Mapp v. Ohio

    Mapp v. Ohio
    4th and 14th Amendment
    In the landmark case Mapp v. Ohio, decided in 1961, the Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure by state and local police officers is inadmissible in state courts, extending the exclusionary rule to the states
  • Pointer v. Texas

    Pointer v. Texas
    The 6th Amendment
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment's right to confront witnesses, including the right to cross-examine, is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial and is made obligatory on the States by the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • Robinson v. California

    Robinson v. California
    8th Amendment
    In Robinson v. California (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a state law making it a crime to be addicted to narcotics was unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, as addiction is a status rather than a crime.
  • Ker v. California

    Ker v. California
    4th Amendment
    The case involved the arrest of two individuals, the Kers, who were arrested in their apartment without a warrant after police suspected them of being involved in narcotics trafficking.
  • Edwards v. South Carolina

    Edwards v. South Carolina
    14th Amendment
    In the landmark 1963 Supreme Court case Edwards v. South Carolina, the Court ruled that state officials violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments by forcing a peaceful crowd of protesters to disperse, emphasizing that the government cannot criminalize the peaceful expression of unpopular views
  • Gideon v. Wainwright

    Gideon v. Wainwright
    6th Amendment
    In the landmark 1963 case Gideon v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel applies to state courts, meaning states must provide attorneys to indigent defendants facing criminal charges. This ruling overturned the previous precedent in Betts v. Brady and ensured a fundamental right to legal representation for all, regardless of their ability to pay
  • Malloy v. Hogan

    Malloy v. Hogan
    14th Amendment
    In the 1964 case of Malloy v. Hogan, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination, which originally applied only to federal proceedings, also applies to state proceedings through the Fourteenth Amendment, meaning states cannot compel someone to incriminate themselves.
  • Klopfer v. North Carolina

    Klopfer v. North Carolina
    6th Amendment
    In Klopfer v. North Carolina, the Supreme Court decided in 1967 that the Sixth Amendment's right to a speedy trial applies to state criminal proceedings, meaning states must respect this right
  • Washington v. Texas

    Washington v. Texas
    6th Amendment
    Immigration enforcement priorities are back at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In a recent 8-1 ruling in United States v. Texas, the Supreme Court held that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to challenge the agency's guidance to line-level personnel on how to direct their enforcement efforts.
  • Duncan v. Louisiana

    Duncan v. Louisiana
    6th Amendment
    In the landmark 1968 case Duncan v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment's right to a jury trial applies to state court proceedings through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, meaning states must also provide jury trials for serious criminal offenses
  • Benton v. Maryland

    Benton v. Maryland
    5th Amendment
    In the landmark case of Benton v. Maryland (1969), the Supreme Court incorporated the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, effectively preventing states from subjecting individuals to double jeopardy.
  • Schilb v. Kuebel

    Schilb v. Kuebel
    14th Amendment
    is a case decided on December 20, 1971, by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Illinois bail system did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The case concerned the constitutionality of an Illinois bail statute. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Illinois Supreme Court
  • Argersinger v. Hamlin

    Argersinger v. Hamlin
    6th Amendment
    The Supreme Court ruled that no person can be imprisoned for any offense
  • Rabe v. Washington

    Rabe v. Washington
    14th Amendment
    In Rabe v. Washington (1972), the U.S. Supreme Court reversed an obscenity conviction of a drive-in theater manager, finding that Washington's obscenity law was impermissibly vague because it failed to provide fair notice that criminal liability depended on the location of the exhibition
  • mcdonald v. chicago

    mcdonald v. chicago
    14th Amendment
    In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms, as recognized in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to state and local governments, not just the federal government.
  • Timbs v. Indiana

    Timbs v. Indiana
    8th Amendment
    In the landmark case of Timbs v. Indiana, the Supreme Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment's protection against excessive fines is an incorporated protection applicable to the states, meaning states cannot impose fines that are grossly disproportionate to the offense.