Supreme Court Cases

1. Supreme Court Cases Learn Ya Some

2. Morse v. Frederick (2007) • Constitution Issue: 1st Amendment • Subject: Whether the sign “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” should be allowed at a “school event”, Morse=Principal, Frederick=Student • Ruling: 5-4 against Frederick, that the sign promoted drug use at a school event so it was inappropriate, limits free speech at schools

3. Grutter v. Bollinger et al. (2003) • 14th Amendment, equal rights • Grutter applied to Michigan Law School but was denied. Michigan says it uses race as a factor in admissions in order to create a diverse student body (affirmative action). Does the school’s affirmative action violate equal rights protection • 5-4 in favor of Bollinger, the court since the school uses multiple criteria that race can be used as one of several factors for highly qualified individuals. • Fisher v. University of Texas?

4. Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. Hialeah (1993) • 1st Amendment, Freedom of Religion (Free Exercise) • The church practiced a Afro-Caribbean religion in which they sacrifice animals and would be eaten most of the time. After the church was built the city of Hialeah, FL passed laws to prohibit the sacrifices without a state-license. • 9-0 the court said the city could not pass laws that prohibit the religious rights of a specific religion.

5. Lee v. Weisman (1992) • 1st Amendment Freedom of Religion (Establishment) • A rabbi spoke at a middle school graduation Weisman’s daughter was graduating so he tried to get a restraining order. It was denied and the rabbi said prayers at the ceremony. He then filed an injunction against the principal (Lee) from inviting clergy in the future. • 5-4 in favor of Weisman, the ceremony created a state-sponsored religious exercise in a public school. The students were forced to stand respectfully and quietly during the prayer making it a state ran prayer, which goes against the Establishment Clause.

6. Employment Division v. Smith (1990) • 1st Amendment, Freedom of Religion (Exercise) • Two Native Americans got fired from their job which was a private drug rehab place for using Peyote as part of their religion. Then the government denied them “jobless benefits” since they got fired for misconduct. After being shot down a first time, the question is whether Oregon state laws making religious use of drugs be an offense that the state can deny unemployment benefits for. • 6-3 going against the 2 Native Americans. The court ruled that each state has the right to choose their own laws regulating benefits. (state rights)

7. Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools v. Mergens (1990) • 1st Amendment, Freedom of Religion, Establishment • Westside High School denied the formation of a Christian club to meet after school, partially because they did not have a faculty sponsor. *Equal Access Act requires federally funded schools to allow all freedom of expression via student groups. • 8-1 in favor of Mergens, schools have to permit to “curriculum” and “non-curriculum student groups”. No students were forced to join the club because of class and topics of club not taught in class.

8. Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) • Constitutional right of privacy, 3rd, 4th, 9th, 14th, Amendment • Griswold gave medical advice to couples about birth control, a Connecticut law made it illegal to counsel married persons to prevent contraception. • 7-2 in favor of Griswold, The Constitution does not formally grant right to privacy, the Amendments about to combine to establish a right to privacy in marital relations

9. Lawrence and Garner v. Texas (2003) • 14th Amendment, equal rights and Due Process • Lawrence and another man were caught in the act of homosexual relations when police entered his residence responding to a weapons disturbance. The two were arrested and convicted for violating Texas laws against certain intimate acts. • 6-3 for Lawrence and Garner, a state cannot be involved in personal and private conduct inside the homes as free adults, therefore the two men were not breaking any laws.

10. Miller v. California (1973) • 1st Amendment, Free Speech, Press • Miller had a mass mailing campaign to sell adult materials, people complained, he was convicted on a California law prohibiting distribution of obscene material. Should the sale of obscene materials be protected by the 1st Amendment. • 5-4 for Miller, his materials were not seen as obscene by the court, however other obscene material would not be protected. The court set up the following guidelines: “whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest. . . whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” = Miller Test

11. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) • 1st Free Press • School-sponsored student newspaper written by students had two articles deemed inappropriate by the principal. The articles were not allowed to be printed. The paper was paid for by the school district. The articles were about teen pregnancy and divorce. The principal did not want younger students reading about sex or did not want the pregnant girls interviewed to be identifiable. • 5-3 in favor of Hazelwood, the 1st does not require schools to promote Freedom of Press . Schools can refuse the right to sponsor speech that is not agreed upon by civilized society.

12. California v. Greenwood (1988) • 4th Amendment, search and seizure • Police suspected Greenwood of selling drugs, they did not have enough evidence for a warrant to search his home, they searched his garbage bags on the street. They found enough evidence and got a warrant to search the house and found drugs. • 6-2 against Greenwood, curbside trash is not protected, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy for trash on public streets that could have been gone through by anything.

13. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) • 6th and 14th Amendment, due process, fair trial, right to counsel • Gideon got arrested for breaking and entering, for his trial he requested a court appointed attorney since he could not afford a private one. The court argued that they do not have to because it was not a death penalty case. He represented himself and got sentenced for 5 years. • 9-0 in favor of Gideon, the court must provide an attorney for all criminal trials. Without an attorney it is not a fair trial and is an essential part of due process.

14. Supreme Court CasesContinued “Snapchat learning” *don’t do snapchat

15. Batman wants you to fill out your pink sheet

16. Goss v. Lopez (1975) • 14th Amendment, due process, fair trial • 1o students were suspended without being told what for. Nor were they able to have a hearing. The question is whether a school has to offer a preliminary hearing. • 5-4 in favor of the students because Ohio made education a fundamental right, therefore the school cannot take that right away without due process, minimal proceedings.

17. Board of Education Independent School District No. 92 v. Earls (2002) • 4th Amendment, search and seizure • Tecumseh, OK school district requires all middle and high school students who participate in extracurricular activities to submit a urine sample. They must submit before they participate and whenever asked to. • 5-4 in favor of the School Board, the testing was important in preventing drug use for students. The students do not have a right to privacy since they are choosing to join a sport or club and that the board is acting to only minimally intrude the student’s privacy.

18. Chicago v. Morales (1999) • 14th Amendment, due process • Chicago passes a “Gang Congregation Ordinance” that prohibits gangs from loitering in public places. A police officer can force the group of suspected gang members. If they do not disperse they can be arrested at the officers discretion of if the perpetrator is a gang member and it is a public place. • 6-3 in favor of Morales, the Ordinance was too vague and gave the officers too much choice on what they considered to be public, loitering, and gang membership. The law does not provide the public with what is prohibited or permitted action.

19. Van Orden v. Perry (2005) • 1st Amendment, Religious Freedom, Establishment • Orden sued Texas because they had a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of state capitol. He said the state was conveying a religious message. The monument was one of 38 on the grounds. It was privately donated. • 5-4 in favor of Perry, the monument was one of many recognizing the nation’s tradition. The monument did not promote religion just because it had religious content

20. McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (2005) • 1st Amendment, Religion, Establishment • ACLU sued over having large copies of the Ten Commandments in their courthouse, during the lawsuit they changed the size and added other documents (at first more religious documents, then founding government documents) that they called the founding American law display. • 5-4 for ACLU, it did advance religion and most citizens walking by would take the display as an endorsement to religion.

21. Planned Parenthood of Southern PA. v. Casey (1992) • 9th Amendment? Roe v. Wade • Pennsylvania passed laws requiring a 24 hour waiting period after signing a consent for the procedure. A minor must consent of a parent. A married woman must tell her husband. Many abortion clinics challenged the laws. • 5-4 for Planned Parenthood. The court upheld the right to have an abortion. Announced a state cannot provide a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion. The only part of the PA laws that did this was informing a husband, so that law was overturned.

22. Marbury v. Madison (1801) • Article III of the Constitution, Judicial Review • William Marbury was appointed a justice of the peace in DC by President Adams in his last days of holding office, it was never finalized though. Madison, the Secretary of State (and Jefferson) did not want the appointment to stand because he was of the opposite political party, so he did not deliver the commissions. • 6-0 for Madison (Chief Justice John Marshall), he could take his position. It also stated that the Supreme Court has authority to rule if a law conflicts with the Constitution… JUDICIAL REVIEW

23. Engel v. Vitale (1962) • 1st, Religion, Establishment • The state of New York authorized a voluntary prayer at the beginning of each school day. It was nondenominational but talked about God. • 6-1 against the prayer. The State cannot not write a prayer to be said in school, nor encourage prayer in school, by doing so it approved religion.

24. Korematsu v. United States (1944) • Article I and II of the Constitution, 5th Amendment • WWII, Presidential Executive Order 9066 and Congressional statues aloud the military to exclude citizens of Japanese ancestry and be taken away from their homes (to relocation camps) to avoid espionage and protect the country. • 6-3 for the US. There was a need to protect the United States by any needs necessary. Constitutionally it may not have been legal but it was necessary. STRICT SCRUTINY TEST = if a law is absolutely necessary for American safety it will be allowed even if it is not Constitutional, the government has the burden to prove that the law is necessary…applies to racial laws and laws that infringe on fundamental Constitutional Rights

25. PINK SHEETS • You should have 32 court cases filled out on your pink sheet, with 11 blank still