-
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
This case involved the Fifth Amendment. The main part was Eminent Domain. The city of Chicago took private land from these companies; however, Chicago paid the companies for their property. Furthermore, because Chicago paid them, they lost the case since the city of Chigago did not violate and right, -
Gitlow v. New York
In this case the main Amendment in focus was the First. This was about a violation of freedom of speech. The main question at had was does the First Amendment prevent a state from punishing political speech that directly advocates the government's violent overthrow? In a seven to two vote the supreme court said that the freedom of speech clause does not protect Gitlow from New York. -
Near v. Minnesota
The freedom of the press part of the First Amendment was the main focus of this case. Writers for a newspaper accused officials of being involved in gangs. The officials claimed that is was slander. However the courts did not agree and said that the it was protected by the First Amendment. -
DeJonge v. Oregon
In DeJonge v. Oregon the main focused was the First Amendment's right to assembly. DeJonge was attending a communist meeting. DeJonge was then arrested and sentenced to seven years as a result. It was ruled that DeJonge had ever right to attend that meeting. -
Cantwell v. Connecticut
The First Amendment's right to freedom of religion was being challenged in this case. Cantwell was a Jehovah's witness going door to door. It was decided that under the First Amendment he had the right to spread his religion to others. -
Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing
The Government was using taxpayer money for religious schools. The question in this case was does this violate the First Amendment in the guidelines of freedom of religion. The Supreme Court ruled that this went against the First Amendment. -
In re Oliver
The Sixth Amendment's public trial was in focus in this case. Oliver was picked for a grand jury. Oliver was later convicted of contempt of court and sentenced to sixty days in jail. Oliver's attorney, who Oliver hired to fight this, filed a habeas corpus. The Supreme Court overturned the ruiling. -
Mapp v. Ohio
The Exclusionary Rule of the Fourth Amendment was the focus of Mapp v. Ohio. Police wanted to enter Mapp's house on suspicion of a bomb in Mapp's house. Mapp declined and said they could not enter. The police left and later came back with a warrant. The police found pornographic material but no bomb. The police arrested Mapp for it. The verdict of this case was that the situation did violate the Fourth Amendment of illegally obtained evidence. -
Robinson v. California
The Eighth Amendment was the focus of Robinson v. California. The Supreme Court ruled that imprisoning someone with an addiction to narcotic drugs. The Supreme Court ruled that it was Cruel and Unusual Punishment. -
Edwards v. South Carolina
The First Amendment's freedom of petition was being challenged in this case. At the South Carolina State Government, 187 black students were convicted for disrupting the peace for having a peaceful assembly. The Supreme Court ruled that this did infringe on their rights. -
Gideon v. Wainwright
Right to Counsel in Felony Court is covered under the Sixth Amendment. Gideon had to represent himself in court and was not given an attorney. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gideon. The Ending of this case grants everyone the right to an attorney no matter what the case is. -
Ker v. California
This Supreme Court case was about a couple. The couple was search and seized for marijuana. The couple argued that it infringed on their Fourth Amendment right of protection from unreasonable searches and seizures. The Supreme Court decided that it was reasonable, and they had every right to search the car. -
Malloy v. Hogan
William Malloy was arrested in a gambling raid. After sixteen months after his plea, a Superior Court appointed referee ordered Malloy to testify about gambling and other criminal activities in Hartford County. William Malloy refused to answer any question. However, they decided to imprison him for not answering. The Supreme Court ruled that this was unconstitutional because it infringed his Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination. -
Pointer v. Texas
Pointer was arrested before he had council. Pointer arrested was justified based on evidence obtained for theft. The Supreme Court ruled on the side of Pointer claiming that this does infringe on Pointer's Sixth Amendment right. -
Klopfer v. North Carolina
Klopfer was accused of criminal trespassing. The jury could not reach a verdict. The state continued to keep extending the trial. Klopfer sued stating that it violated the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution. The right to a speedy trial. When the Supreme Court ruled, they ruled in favor of Klopfer. -
Washington v. Texas
Washington was convicted of murder and sentenced to fifty years in prison. Washington claimed that Charles Fuller was the one responsible for the shooting. However, the law kept an already convicted person from basically being a witness or used in other cases. The question was did this violate the Sixth Amendment. The Supreme Court said it did. The agreed that it was a violation of due process. -
Duncan v. Louisiana
A black teen, Duncan, was denied a jury in his case. He was being accused of assaulting a white teen. He argued that it violated his Sixth Amendment, right to a jury in a criminal case. The Supreme Court sided with Duncan and said that it did infringe on his rights. -
Benton v. Maryland
Benton was trialed once which he was found not guilty. Benton was the trialed a second time. However, this time he was found guilty. Benton claimed that this violated the Fifth Amendment, Double Jeopardy. The Supreme Court Sided in favor of Benton. -
Schilb v. Kuebel
Schilb was placed on bail. One of the charges was dropped, which lowered the bail. Schilb said that he should be refunded, and if it wasn't then it violated his Eighth Amendment of excessive bail. However, the Supreme Court did not agree with Schilb. -
Rabe v. Washington
He was convicted for violating Wahington's obscenity statue for playing a sexual movie and a drive in theater. The Supreme Court decided that the states could not punish the showing of motion pictures when the location is not cleary expressed at the main part of the case. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin involved the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution. The key part of it though was right to counsel for imprisonable misdemeanors. The main question the supreme court needed to answer was does the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee a right to counsel to defendants who are accused of committing misdemeanors? This question started when Jon Argersinger was being charged with a misdemeanor. During Jon Argersinger's trial he did not get an attorney. -
McDonald v. Chicago
Lawsuits were filed against Chicago for their gun bans. The lawsuits were challenging these gun bans for violating the Second Amendments, the rights to bear arms. The Supreme Court decided to hear the case. The agreed with five saying it did go against the Second Amendment and four saying it did not go against the Second Amendment. -
Timbs v. Indiana
Timbs bought a car for 42,000 dollars. Timbs used the car to travel heroin across Indiana. The state sought to forfeit the land rover. Timbs argued that it was a violation of his Eighth Amendment right of excessive fines. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Timbs.