-
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago was a case concerning the eminent domain clause of the fifth amendment, the court ruled in a 7-1 decision that states were required to award just compensation when taking private property for public use. -
Gitlow V New York
Gitlow V New York was a case involving the first amendment that was decided in 1925. The court upheld the conviction of Gitlow for printing a manifesto advocating a violent overthrow of the government, -
Near V Minnesota
Near V Minnesota was a landmark case in 1930 concerning freedom of the press and the first amendment, the court ruled in a 5-4 decision that prior restraint was unconstitutional. -
Dejonge V Oregon
Dejonge V Oregon was a supreme court case concerning the freedom of assembly clause of the first amendment, in 1937 the court sided in a unanimous decision with Dejonge. -
Cantwell V Connecticut
Cantwell V Connecticut was a case about the free exercise of religion decided in 1940. The court ruled the regulations on solicitation based on religion was unconstitutional. the Supreme Court applied First Amendment freedom of religion rights to the states via the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. -
Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing
Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing was a supreme court case in 1947 concerning the first amendment, The court ruled the state bill was constitutionally permissible because the reimbursements were offered to all students, regardless of religion. -
ln Re Oliver
ln Re Oliver was a 1948 case concerning the sixth amendment. In re Oliver established that the right to a public trial of the Sixth Amendment applies to state court criminal proceedings. -
Mapp V Ohio
Mapp V Ohio was a 1961 case concerning the fourth amendment,The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. The high court said evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts. -
Robinson V california
Robinson V California was a case decided in 1962, in a 6-2 decision the court ruled that imprisonment for being addicted to narcotics violated the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the eighth amendment. -
Ker V California
Ker V California was a 1963 supreme court case concerning the Fourth Amendment, the court ruled by a vote of 5–4. The Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable search and seizure and the exclusionary rule for evidence obtained from unreasonable search and seizure apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. -
Edwards V South Carolina
Edwards V South Carolina was a case decided in 1963 and it involves the right to petition in the first amendment. The court ruled that South Carolina had violated students rights to freedom of petition. -
Gideon V Wainwright
Gideon V Wainright was a 1963 case concerning the 6th amendment, Decision: In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Gideon, guaranteeing the right to legal counsel for criminal defendants in federal and state courts. -
Malloy V Hogan
Malloy V Hogan was a 1964 supreme court case concerning the fifth amendments protection from self-incrimination, In a 5-to-4 opinion, the Court held that the Fifth Amendment's exception from compulsory self-incrimination is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against abridgment by a state. -
Pointer V Texas
Pointer V Texas was a 1965 supreme court case concerning the Sixth amendments right to confront your accuser, the court decided 9-0 on April 5, 1965, that state criminal proceedings that do not allow a defendant to cross-examine a witness violate the right to confrontation outlined in the Sixth Amendment. -
Klopfer V North Carolina
Klopfer V North Carolina was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the Speedy Trial Clause of the United States Constitution in state court proceedings.The Supreme Court held that indefinitely suspending a trial violates a defendant's right to a speedy trial. -
Washington V Texas
Washington V Texas was a 1967 supreme court case concerning the right to a compulsory process to obtain witnesses for the defense clause of the 6th Amendment.Texas is a case decided 9-0 on June 12, 1967, by the United States Supreme Court holding a Texas statute prohibiting persons charged together in the same crime from testifying for each other violated the Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process. -
Duncan V Louisiana
Duncan V Louisiana was a supreme court case decided in 1968, the case concerned the right to a trial by jury in the sixth amendment, the court ruled 7-2 in favor of Duncanby arguing that the right to a jury trial in criminal cases was fundamental and central to the American conception of justice. -
Benton V Maryland
Brenton V Maryland was a 1969 supreme court case concerning the Fifth amendments protection against double jeopardy, The Court -- in a 7-2 decision -- overruled Palko, holding that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment as applied to the states is an element of liberty protected by Due Process of the Fourteenth Amendment. -
Schilb v. Kuebel
Schilb v. Kuebel was a 1971 supreme court case concerning the protection against excessive bail provided by the eight amendment, the court ruled 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. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin was a 1971 supreme court case concerning the Right to counsel for imprisonable misdemeanors protected under the sixth amendment,a unanimous Court extended that right to cover defendants charged with misdemeanors who faced the possibility of a jail sentence. -
Rabe V Washington
Rabe V Washington was a 1972 supreme court case concerning the right to be informed of nature of accusations protected by the sixth amendment,the Supreme Court reversed the obscenity conviction of the manager of a drive-in movie theater in Richland, Washington. -
McDonald V Chicago
McDonald V Chicago was a 2010 supreme court case concerning the right to keep and bear arms protected by the second amendment, On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, reversed the Seventh Circuit's decision, holding that the Second Amendment was incorporated under the Fourteenth Amendment, thus protecting those rights from infringement by state and local governments. -
Timbs v. Indiana
Timbs v. Indiana was a 2019 supreme court case concerning the protection from excessive fines of the eight amendment, In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled in Timbs that the Eighth Amendment's ban on excessive fines applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.