-
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
It determined the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment required states to provide just compensation for seizing private property. 5th amendment Eminent domain -
Gitlow v. New York
A case in which the Court held that the First Amendment right to free speech is applicable against the states via the Fourteenth Amendment. 1st amendment Freedom of speech -
Near v. Minnesota
A case in which the Supreme Court held that prior restraint on publication violated the First Amendment. 1st amendment. Freedom of the press. -
DeJonge v. Oregon
the Supreme Court ruled that state governments may not violate the constitutional right of peaceable assembly. 1st amendment. freedom of assembly. -
Cantwell v. Connecticut
The first case in which 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
marked the first time the Court used the Fourteenth Amendment to apply the religion clauses of the First Amendment at the state level 1st amendment. Government establishment of religion. -
Mapp v. Ohio
concurred in the judgment but agreed fully with Part I of Justice Harlan's dissent and expressed no view as to the merits of the constitutional issue. -
Robinson v. California
A jury found the defendant guilty under a California statute that criminalized being addicted to narcotics. 8th Amendment. Cruel and unusual punishment -
Edwards v. South Carolina
The Court stated that these rights are guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from invasion by the States. -
Gideon v. Wainwright
the decision in which the Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires U.S. states to provide an attorney. 6th amendment. Right to counsel in felony cases. -
Ker v. California
incorporated the Fourth Amendment's protections against illegal search and seizure. 4th amendment.Protection against unreasonable search and seizure. -
Malloy v. Hogan
This case ensured protection under the Fifth Amendment for individuals in the future and asserted that this was possible through the protections of the 14th Amendment. 5th Amendment. Protection against self-incrimination. -
Miranda v. Arizona
the Supreme Court of Arizona affirmed and held that Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated because he did not specifically request counsel. 5th Amendment.Right to be informed of rights upon arrest. -
Washington v. Texas
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
Court held that the Sixth Amendment guarantee of trial by jury in criminal cases was "fundamental to the American scheme of justice," and that the states were obligated under the Fourteenth Amendment to provide such trials. -
Benton v. Maryland
This case ruled that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment applies to the states. In doing so, Benton expressly overruled Palko v. Connecticut. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin
this case expands the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to all individuals who "may be imprisoned for any offense, whether classified as petty, misdemeanor, or felony. -
Schilb v. Kuebel
The court held the statute unconstitutional on the ground of vagueness and the absence of any standards sufficient to enable a defendant to protect himself. -
Rabe v. Washington
Rabe v. Washington was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of obscenity laws and criminal procedure to the states. It used the 6th Amendment. right to be informed of nature of accusations -
McDonald v. Chicago
Here, plaintiffs argued that the Second Amendment should also apply to the states. The district court dismissed the suits. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed. -
Timbs v. Indiana
The Indiana Supreme Court reversed, concluding that the U.S. Supreme Court had never clearly incorporated the Eighth Amendment against the states under the Fourteenth Amendment. The court also ruled that the state had proven its entitlement to forfeit the Land Rover under state law.