Required Supreme Court Cases Flashcards
Marbury v Madison (1803): Background
- Before John Adams’ presidential term ended, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801 (creating new courts, adding new judges)
- It was an effort by John Adams to keep his own influence in federal courts even though he was leaving office
- His appointments to these courts, however, were not valid until the appointed judges were delivered their commissions by Jefferson’s Secretary of State, James Madison, who refused to deliver the commissions
- William Marbury was one of the judges appointed, and sued over his failed commission
Marbury v Madison (1803): Constitutional issue
- Whether the Court had the authority to order the delivery of commission
- If a federal judge could even bring the case to court
Marbury v Madison (1803): Holding
- The Court held that although legally, the commission should have been delivered, the clause of the Judiciary Act of 1789 which enabled Marbury to bring the case to court was unconstitutional
- By declaring a law made by Congress unconstitutional, the practice of judicial review was established
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Background
- In 1816, the Second Bank of the United States was chartered; soon after, in 1818, however, Maryland decided to pass a law that imposed taxes on the bank
- James McCulloch, who served as a cashier at the Baltimore branch of the Second Bank, decided not to pay the tax
- The state court had ruled that the Bank was unconstitutional, to begin with, and that the federal government did not have the authority to charter a bank
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Constitutional principle
- The supremacy clause
- The necessary and proper clause
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Holding
- The Court concluded based on the Necessary & Proper Clause that Congress is not limited by its expressed powers
- It was decided that through Congress’ implied powers, they had the ability to create a bank
- Congress is allowed to borrow money, coin money, and tax expressly by the Constitution. The implied power of creating a national bank allows for the federal government to implement this expressed power
- Based on the Supremacy Clause, the national laws were superior to state laws, so the states were not allowed to tax the federal government
Schenck v United States (1919): Background
- During World War I, a pair of socialists, including Charles Schenck distributed leaflets that stated the draft violated the 13th Amendment - which prohibits involuntary servitude
- The leaflet wanted people to disobey the draft. Schenck was charged with violating the Espionage Act of 1917
- They appealed on the grounds of the First Amendment
Schenck v. United States (1919): Constitutional principle
The 1st Amendment’s free speech clause
Schenck v. United States (1919): Holding
- The Supreme Court held that the Espionage Act did not violate the First Amendment and it was an appropriate exercise of Congress’ wartime authority
- Schenck’s speech represented a “clear and present danger” as it encourage people to boycott a draft during a time of war
- This was a key limitation on the First Amendment as the free speech clause does not allow for advocacy of unlawful behavior
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Background
- In 1951, Oliver Brown had attempted to enroll his daughter in an all-white school close to the family’s home. However, the school refused to accept her enrollment and she was forced to attend a segregated school much farther away
- The Browns, along with other families, sued the Topeka Board of Education, arguing that racial segregation in public schools violated the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Constitutional principle
The 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Holding
- The Court held that “separate but equal is inherently unequal,” and therefore racial segregation of public schools is unconstitutional
- The segregated schools allowed by the previous Plessy case were declared unconstitutional
Engel v. Vitale (1962): Background
- The New York Board of Regents had authorized that at the beginning of each day, a short but voluntary prayer would be recited
- Several organizations filed suit against the Board of Regents, claiming that the prayer violated the Constitution
- The New York Court of Appeals dismissed their arguments
Engel v. Vitale (1962): Constitutional principle
The 1st Amendment’s establishment clause
Engel v. Vitale (1962): Holding
- The court held that states could not hold prayers in public school EVEN IF it was voluntary and EVEN IF the prayer did not adhere to a specific religion
- Because the act of prayer was considered a religious activity, having it occur in a public school (which is funded by the government) would go against the establishment clause of the first amendment
Baker v. Carr (1962): Background
- A Tennessee law stated that every 10 years, legislative districts must be redrawn. However, in 1962, the districts had not been redrawn since 1901
- Due to rapid changes in population areas (meaning people began moving to urban areas rapidly, causing them to be heavily populated), rural areas with lower populations were more represented versus populated urban areas
Baker v. Carr (1962): Constitutional principle
The 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause
Baker v Carr (1962): Holding
- Legislative redistricting was a matter that the Court could weigh in on as it did not contain any political questions
- The 14th Amendment warranted judicial intervention in Tennessee’s case
Gideon v Wainwright (1963): Background
- Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in Florida state court on a felony - breaking and entering charge
- During his trial, Gideon requested that he receive a court-appointed lawyer; however, in accordance with Florida State law, an indigent defendant could only have an attorney be appointed in capital crimes/cases
- Gideon then filed a habeas corpus suit, stating that the court’s decision violated his rights to be represented, or his 6th Amendment right
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963): Constitutional principle
6th Amendment
Gideon v Wainwright (1963): Holding
The 6th Amendment’s right to counsel applies to state court defendants via the 14th Amendment
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969): Background
- A group of students decided to wear black armbands in order to protest the Vietnam War
- Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt decided that they would wear their armbands to school despite warnings from school administration
- After wearing the armbands to school, they were sent home. The students decided to sue their school district for violating their freedom of expression/free speech
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969): Constitutional principle
1st Amendment’s free speech clause
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969): Holding
- The armbands did not create a disruption within the learning environment and therefore represented protected symbolic speech
- Students still have free speech rights at school, and in order to justify the suppression of speech, the speech must substantially interfere with school operations