-
Lemon v. Kurtzman
- est. clause case
- arg: NO to $ bonus to parochial teachers who did NOT teach religion
- Precedent: "Lemon Test" recognizes language
- 1must have a secular purpose
- 2., not excessive entanglement
- 3. NOT support/ inhibit religion
-
Engel v. Vitale
- est. clause
- ARG: praying at school over intercom prayer created by State Board
- PREC: court defines what est. clause means: "wall of separation bet. church and state"
-
Santa Fe ISD v. Doe
- Rel.
- ARG: senior class rep. would pray before football game
- PRE: Praying over PA system by student at school event= unconstitutional bc it is govt funded
-
Wisconsin v. Yoder
- (free excercise)
- amish case
- ARG: take kids out of school at 14, Wis. argued already established way of life doesnt need more education
- PRE: free excercise is sovereign over state's decision of higher educated populace.
-
Reynolds v. U.S.
- ARG: morman polygamist said outlawing polygamy = unconstitutional
- PRE: can't outlaw beliefs, but can outlaw PRACTICES
-
Employment Division v. Smith
- ARG: nat. amn fired bc he was on peyote sued bc not given unemployment benefits
- PRE: reaffirmed reynolds v. u.s. , this said could practice peyote, just its not constitutionally protected
-
Tx v. Johnson
- (flag burning case)
- ARG: torched flag is protected under prot. of expression
- PRE: YEs. Burning flag = protected expression
-
Tinker v. Des Moines
- black anti-war band worn by students seen as disruptive
- ARG: band is free expression
- PRE: in school environment, student can NOT limit speech UNLESS limitation is "reasonably related to legit. pedigogical concerns"
-
Roth v. U.S.
- obscene mail sent through mail, trying to solicit perscriptions
- PRE:1 obscenity = NOT protected speech
- 2. community will dictate level of obscenity
-
Miller v. Calif.
- obscene material sent thru mail
- PRE: defined obscenity as 3 part test:
- 1. pruient int. (morbid)
- 2. acts that demean wmn
- 3. lacks any serious, scientific, literary, or political value
-
Brandenburg v. Ohio
- clan case
- PRE: criminal syndicate arrested
-
Schenck v. U.S.
- arrested during WWI for dissuading men into draft
- PRE: appropriate to limit speech when it provokes clear and present danger
-
Near v. Minnesota
- (jewish gangster)
- newspaper trying to prevent article being published
- PRE: can NOT prevent something from being published
-
NY Times v. Sullivan
- (1st amendment press case)
- Dealt with full page advertisement saying Sheriff = racist
- PRE: defines liability (important ppl must cover all three, normal just one)
- 1. has to be false
- 2. prove that it's harmful to representatives
- 3. malice, done on purpose when known as false
-
D.C. v. Heller
- ARG: created only way to get gun thru permit but NO way to get permit
- PREC: all have right to own gun (2nd am.) no law can hinder that
-
Mapp v. Ohio
- (4th am.)
- ARG: housing bomber suspected to in Mapp's house, NO warrant, so cops give her fake one, she is arrested for having porn in her nightstand
- PRE: exclusionary rule
-
Terry v. Ohio
- Arg: Terry and Bank appear suspicious, as in about to rob bank, so undercover cop frisks them and arrests for concealment of weapons
- PRE: "Terry frisk"= constitutional when suspicious, pat-down for sake of safety of public
-
New Jersey v. TLO
- girls smoking in bathroom, TLO denies she was smoking, purse searched by teacher , found to have narcotics
- PRE: reasonable suspicion in school environment to search
-
California v. Acevedo
- ARG: police following hime bc suspected to have box of marijuana
- PRE: have tight to search item w/ probable cause, if object confirmed to be ILLEGAL then can do FULL vehicle search
-
Minn. v. Dickerson
- 4th
- ARG: walks out of crack house , walks other way of car, reasonable cause to search for crack
- PRE: reasonable suspicion limited to guns
-
Wyoming v. Houghton
- 4th
- ARG: w/prob. cause can they search items others w/in vehicle
- PRE: if prob. cause to search car, have right to search everything in car
-
Miranda v. Arizona
- 5th amendment
- ARG: arrested for rape , Not read rights, forced confession, police denied him req. to attorney
- PRE: right against self-incrimination , req. to be informed of rights
-
Gideon v. Wainwright
- pool hall, non-capitol felony, could NOT defend himself
- PRE: anyone accused of felony must have right to attorney
-
Gregg v. GA
- hitch hiker kills his driver
- convicted-> death penalty
- ARG: is this cruel and unusual punishment?
- PRE: no, this is not cruel nor unusual
-
Griswold v. Connecticut
- (privacy case )
- ARG: giving info. + med. attention to prevent conception, against Conn. statute
- PRE: created right to privacy (only w/in marriage)
-
Roe v. Wade
- (privacy)
- wants abortion, argues TX law against abortion that it infringes on her right of choice
- PRE: expands privacy of choice except 3rd trimester when baby can live on its own
-
Lawrence v. TX
- sodimy case
- PRE: privacy to same sex couples
-
Plessy v. Ferguson
- 14th amendment plessy asked to sit in black part of train, 7/8 white,
- PRE: "seperate but equal"
-
Korematsu v. U.S.
- ARG: Japanese internment camps
- PRE: in times of war, GOVT has right to limit rights of groups (camps = const.)
-
Brown v. B.O.E.
Pre: "seperate vut equal" = is inherently unequal
-
Reg. of Cal. v. Bakke
- UC-Davis has 16- for special admissions, 84- open to all
- PRE: quotas are unconstitutional
-
Adarand v. Pena
- ARG: govt contract chose hispanic company over lowest bidder
- PRE: when race is involved, strict scrutiny
-
Gratz v. Bollinger
- 14th
- 100 points to get into U. of Mich.
- # of pts for perfect SAT = minority race #
- PRE: race is a factor but among many factors
-
Hopwood v. TX
- (Tx Supreme Court case) 14th
- UT law, over qualified k inhibited by minority
- PRE: should not be a factor, not ultimate but now resulted to top 10%
-
Dred Scott v. Sandford
- ARG: slave, escaped to a free state, asked for freedom since resided in free state
- PRE: not human but property
|
|