-
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago. A landmark case in the United States Supreme Court dealt with the issue of property rights and municipalities' power to regulate private property use. The City of Chicago attempted to regulate the use of a railroad terminal owned by the Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company. The railroad company argued that the city's actions constituted an unconstitutional taking of its property without compensation. -
Gitlow v. New York
Gitlow v. New York, 1st Amendment, Freedom of speech. The Supreme Court ruled that through the 14th Amendment, the 1st Amendment right to free speech was incorporated against state governments. In this case, a state government attempted to restrict speech using prior restraint. It was found that this was not a permissible action. -
Near v. Minnesota
Near v. Minnesota, 1st, Freedom of the Press (Prior Restraint). Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court under which prior restraint on publication was found to violate freedom of the press as protected under the First Amendment. -
DeJonge v. Oregon
De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause applies freedom of assembly against the states. -
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, is a landmark court decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment's federal protection of religious free exercise incorporates via the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and so applies to state governments too. -
Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing
Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that applied the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to state law. -
In re Oliver
In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the right of due process in state court proceedings. This was over the 6th Amendment. -
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents prosecutors from using evidence in court that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies not only to the federal government but also to the U.S. state governments. -
Robinson v. California
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit the criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime. -
Gideon v. Wainwright
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires U.S. states to provide attorneys to criminal defendants who are unable to afford their own. -
Edwards v. South Carolina
Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229, was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution forbade state government officials to force a crowd to disperse when they are otherwise legally marching in front of a state house. -
Ker v. California
Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23, was a case before the United States Supreme Court, which incorporated the Fourth Amendment's protections against illegal search and seizure. The case was decided on June 10, 1963, by a vote of 5–4. -
Malloy v. Hogan
Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1, was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States deemed defendants' Fifth Amendment privilege not to be compelled to be witnesses against themselves was applicable within state courts as well as federal courts, overruling the decision in Twining v. New Jersey. -
Pointer v. Texas
Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the right of to confront accusers in state court proceedings. -
Klopfer v. North Carolina
Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213, 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. This was the 6th Amendment. -
Washington v. Texas
Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14, is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution is applicable in state courts as well as federal courts. -
Duncan v. Louisiana
Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, was a significant United States Supreme Court decision that incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial and applied it to the states. -
Benton v. Maryland
Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784, is a Supreme Court of the United States decision concerning double jeopardy. Benton ruled that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment applies to the states. In doing so, Benton expressly overruled Palko v. Connecticut. -
Schilb v. Kuebel
John Schilb was charged with leaving the scene of a car accident and obstructing traffic. He paid 10% of his bail, in accordance with state law, to the clerk of the courts. He amount he had deposited was returned to him with $7.50 less than the amount paid. The court clerk had retained 1% of the amount deposited as a bail bond cost. The defendant filed a class action against the court clerk on the grounds that the charge violated the Equal Protection Clause. This was the 8th Amendment. -
Rabe v. Washington
Rabe v. Washington, 405 U.S. 313, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of obscenity laws and criminal procedure to the states. This was the 6th Amendment. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, is a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the accused cannot be subjected to actual imprisonment unless provided with counsel. Gideon v. Wainwright made the right to counsel provided in the Sixth Amendment applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. -
McDonald v. Chicago
Several suits were filed against Chicago and Oak Park in Illinois challenging their gun bans after the Supreme Court issued its opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller. In that case, the Supreme Court held that a District of Columbia handgun ban violated the Second Amendment. -
Timbs v. Indiana
Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U.S. ___, was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court dealt with the applicability of the excessive fines clause of the Constitution's Eighth Amendment to state and local governments in the context of asset forfeiture.