C3.2(2) LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASESMarbury v Madison (1803)

ISSUE: Judicial ReviewThis is in your C3.1(4) notes, add to these notes

C3.2(2)

• McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)• ISSUE: Federalism (Necessary and Proper Clause)• Q: Can the Government create a national bank?• It is not granted that power in the Const.

• A: yes. • WHY? Because Congress has “implied powers”(the elastic

clause)

C3.2(2)

• Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)• ISSUE: Federalism (Commerce Clause) • Q: When State Gov’t and Federal Gov’t laws conflict, who

wins?• A: Federal Gov’t wins.• Why? Constitution gives Congress the right to regulate

interstate (between state) commerce

C3.2(2)

• Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)• ISSUE: Slavery (Due Process)• Q: Can an African-American sue someone in court?• A: No.• WHY? Because they are not citizens, so are not protected

under the Constitution

C3.2(2)

• Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)• ISSUE: Segregation (Equal Protection Clause)• Q: is it legal to have separate facilities for Blacks and Whites?• A: Yes• WHY? Segregation is constitutional (“separate but equal”)

C 3 .2 (2 )

• Brown v. Board of Education (1954)• ISSUE: Segregation (Equal Protection) • Q: Is segregation legal?• A: No• WHY? State laws requiring “separate but equal” schools are

unconstitutional

C 3 .2 (2 )

• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)• ISSUE: Right to a Lawyer (Due Process) • Q: Are states required to provide attorneys for some felony

defendants?• A: Yes• WHY? States are bound by the Constitution, too

C3.2(2)

• Mapp v. Ohio (1961)• ISSUE: Unreasonable Search and Seizure (Due Process) • Q: can police search your house without a warrant?• A: No• WHY: the Constitution prohibits “unreasonable search and

seizure”

C3.2(2)

• Miranda v. Arizona (1966)• ISSUE: Self-Incrimination • Q: can police question you without first notifying you of your

rights? • A: No• WHY? The Constitution protects us from self-incrimination

C3.2(2)

• Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)• ISSUE: Freedom of Speech• Q: Can students wear certain clothing as a form of protest?• A: Yes• WHY? Students do not lose their constitutional rights when

they enter a school

C3.2(2)

• United States v. Nixon (1974)• ISSUE: Checks and Balances• Q: Is the president immune from checks and balances under

“executive privilege”? • A: No• WHY: Executive Privilege has limits

C 3 .2 (2 )

• Regents of the U. of California v. Bakke (1978)• ISSUE: Affirmative Action (Equal Protection)• Q: should race help determine who is accepted to

universities? • A: No and Yes• WHY? The University’s code was too rigid, but Affirmative

Action is constitutional

C 3 .2 (2 )

• New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)• ISSUE: Unreasonable Search and Seizure • Q: Do school officials need “probable cause” to search a

student?• A: No• WHY? “probable cause” is for police outside of school, in

school “reasonable suspicion” is enough

C3.2(2)

• Texas v. Johnson (1989)• ISSUE: Freedom of Speech• Q: is burning the American flag protected under “freedom of

speech”?• A: Yes• WHY? Freedom of speech protects even those who offend

people

C 3 .2 (2 )

• Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988)• ISSUE: Censorship (Freedom of the Press)• Q: Can a principal censor student speech in a school

newspaper?• A: Yes• WHY? Schools must set high standards for student speech in

non-public forums

C3.2(1) SUMMARY QUESTIONS

Choose 5 cases that interest you the most. Explain why you believe the Supreme Court got it right, or got it wrong.