The History of SCOTUS

By trc3495
  • THE BEGINNING: The Judiciary Act of 1789

    THE BEGINNING: The Judiciary Act of 1789
    This act, passed by Congress, created SCOTUS, or the Supreme Court of the United States, after being provided with a basis by the Constitution. It formed 13 district courts, 3 circuit courts, and one primary court, which created the SCOTUS we know today.
  • RULING: Chisholm v. Georgia

    RULING: Chisholm v. Georgia
    Georgia had taken possession of property from Crown-loyal men throughout the Revolution. Two South Carolinians petitioned the Court to hear their lawsuit against Georgia because they had a pre-Revolutionary War claim to such an estate. It concurred, stating that it has the authority to try these instances under the Constitution. However, Georgia's attorneys failed to show up on the scheduled date for the argument in 1793. Nevertheless, the court decided in the South Carolinians' favor.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Chisholm v. Georgia

    SIGNIFICANCE: Chisholm v. Georgia
    This lawsuit ended up worrying many states, as they did not agree with the court's ruling in matters that could affect their situations drastically. In order to prevent citizens of other states from suing another state in federal court, they passed the Eleventh Amendment. As a result, the citizens for the first time overturned the Supreme Court and created their own major precedent.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Marbury v. Madison

    SIGNIFICANCE: Marbury v. Madison
    This case was a landmark one, as it established judicial review, which is the power to declare a law unconstitutional. This concept exists today within the Supreme Court and was applied in the cases of Matal v. Tam and the Dred Scott Decision.
  • RULING: Marbury v. Madison

    RULING: Marbury v. Madison
    Right before leaving office, John Adams appointed 42 officials to the government through the Judiciary Act. One of these officials was Marbury, whose commission wasn’t delivered, so he petitioned James Madison, the Secretary of State, to send his commission but Madison refused. Chief Justice Marshall ruled that it was illegal for Madison to refuse to deliver the commission but that the Court didn’t have the jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus and that the Judiciary Act was unconstitutional.
  • RULING: McCulloch v. Maryland

    RULING: McCulloch v. Maryland
    Maryland started imposing a tax of $15,000 a year on the National Bank in Maryland. The cashier, McCulloch refused to pay it, so the case went to the Supreme Court. Maryland claimed that because it was a sovereign state, it sustained the right to tax any entity within its borders. Justice Marshall ruled that Congress had the authority to create the Bank of the United States. Additionally, he maintained that states do not have the authority to tax any authority by the federal government.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: McCulloch v. Maryland

    SIGNIFICANCE: McCulloch v. Maryland
    This case established the idea that Congress has implied powers that aren’t specifically listed in the Constitution such as creating a National Bank. It also established a regulation of the power of states of the federal government, a notion that would be replicated in many cases to come.
  • RULING: Gibbons v. Ogden

    RULING: Gibbons v. Ogden
    Ogden, a leaseholder, was given permission to travel between New Jersey and New York. Gibbons, Ogden's rival, already had a permit from the government to run those waters. Ogden filed a lawsuit requesting the courts to prevent Thomas Gibbons from operating boats from New Jersey to New York for business purposes. The New York state legislation giving monopoly navigation rights was declared illegal by the Supreme Court, who also ruled that the federal government has control over interstate trade.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Gibbons v. Ogden

    SIGNIFICANCE: Gibbons v. Ogden
    This case ruling made it so that states were forbidden from passing any law that would conflict with Congress's authority to control interstate trade. In simpler terms, it gave important to the federal government's power over the state's, similar to McCulloch v. Maryland.
  • RULING: Dred Scott v. Sandford

    RULING: Dred Scott v. Sandford
    In this case from before the Civil War, the issue was whether Congress had the authority under the Constitution to forbid slavery in free areas. The right of federal court litigation for African Americans was a second issue that needed to be addressed. Congress could not prohibit slavery in territories, and African Americans also had no right to sue in federal court.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Dred Scott v. Sandford

    SIGNIFICANCE: Dred Scott v. Sandford
    The Dred Scott case became a major topic in the discussion about the growth of slavery and stoked the fires that eventually led to the Civil War. It was also an example of the use of judicial review as begun by Marbury v. Madison.
  • RULING: Schenck v. United States

    RULING: Schenck v. United States
    This case covered the issue of whether specific speech that is considered to be done during a time of war and to be in violation of the Espionage Act, such as distributing antiwar literature to conscripted troops, is protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled that in some cases, like this one where the country was at war, such First Amendment restrictions are appropriate.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Schenck v. United States

    SIGNIFICANCE: Schenck v. United States
    The "clear and present danger" standard, which allowed for speech restrictions if there was a clear and present risk, was established as a result of this case ruling. It expanded on the first amendment which stated that everyone has the right to speech. Later, Brandenburg v. Ohio amended Schenck by stating that speech might be prohibited if it would lead to a "imminent unlawful conduct."
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Brown v. Board of Education

    SIGNIFICANCE: Brown v. Board of Education
    Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which established the "separate but equal" concept, was overturned in the Brown decision. In Plessy, the Supreme Court ruled that even though a Louisiana statute enforced racial segregation of train passengers, as long as the accommodations in question were "separate, but equal," there was no violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The Brown Court helped pave the way for the civil rights movement and integration across the nation by overthrowing this concept.
  • RULING: Brown v. Board of Education

    RULING: Brown v. Board of Education
    This case covered the issue of whether the Equal Protection Clause is violated by public schools that are separated based on race. The Supreme Court reversed Plessy v. Ferguson and determined that state laws requiring or permitting racial segregated schools are unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
  • RULING: Gideon v. Wainwright

    RULING: Gideon v. Wainwright
    This case covered the issue of whether the Constitution mandates that someone accused of a felony but unable to afford legal representation is allowed free legal representation. The Court ruled that the right to legal representation in criminal state court proceedings is protected by the Sixth Amendment and that attorneys in criminal court are "necessities, not luxuries."
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Gideon v. Wainwright

    SIGNIFICANCE: Gideon v. Wainwright
    The Gideon judgment had the impact of extending public defender systems state and nationwide as well as providing the right to help for state criminal offenders.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Miranda v. Arizona

    SIGNIFICANCE: Miranda v. Arizona
    The now-famous "Miranda warnings"—which must be given at the start of any police custody interrogation if any of the information gleaned from it will be utilized in court—have been restricted and condensed over time by the Supreme Court.
  • RULING: Miranda v. Arizona

    RULING: Miranda v. Arizona
    This case raised the question of whether police are compelled by the Constitution to advise those in detention of their rights to silence and to counsel. The Court ruled that the 5th and 6th Amendments mandate the police warn those who are being held that they have the right to stay quiet and the right to legal representation. The Court states that a criminal court judge may decide that any remarks made by the accused cannot be included as evidence during the trial if the police fail to do so.
  • RULING: Tinker v. Des Moines

    RULING: Tinker v. Des Moines
    This case brought attention to the issue of whether the First Amendment forbids public school administrators from forbidding students from using black armbands to represent political protest against the war. The Court concluded the students' speech may only be suppressed if it truly interfered with the educational process. The school had violated students' First Amendment rights to free expression because there was no proof that there had been a disruption of class.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Tinker v. Des Moines

    SIGNIFICANCE: Tinker v. Des Moines
    Any defenses of First Amendment rights related to schools now center on this case and its ruling. It uplifted the power and importance of the students over the power of administrators and teachers at a school.
  • RULING: Roe v. Wade

    RULING: Roe v. Wade
    This case centered around whether the Constitution forbids legislation that drastically limit or forbid an abortion for women. In 1973, the Court ruled that these measures go against the right to privacy guaranteed by the Constitution. According to the Court, governments are only permitted to restrict abortions at the end of a pregnancy if doing so will save the life of the mother or the unborn child. However, this ruling was overturned in 2022 in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Roe v. Wade

    SIGNIFICANCE: Roe v. Wade
    Both in front of the Court and in the public eye, this case has emerged as a focal point in the debate over abortion rights, up until 2022 when it was overturned. In 1973 though, it marked a significant change in how female reproductive rights were viewed and this was a case that many women viewed as a victory as it led to less unsafe abortions and healthier women.
  • RULING: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

    RULING: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
    This case covered the issue of whether a higher education institution can consider race when determining admissions. The Court ruled that as long as set quotas aren't imposed, institutions may consider race as part of the admissions process. The Court ruled that the particular mechanism in existence at the University of California Medical School was unnecessary to achieve the objective of forming a diverse student population and was essentially a set quota and was, as a result, unconstitutional.
  • SIGNIFICANCE: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

    SIGNIFICANCE: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
    The ruling marked the beginning of the Court sustaining affirmative action policies. In Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger, such academic affirmative action schemes were once more explicitly contested. In these judgments, the Court made it clear that admissions policies that take race into account are constitutional as long as the policy doesn't automatically favor one race over another.
  • RULING: Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization

    RULING: Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
    After years of controversy and debate surrounding the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion, in this also landmark case, the court held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion, overturning the Roe v. Wade decision from 1973.