Amendment One

1. Amendment One Freedom of Speech

2. Supreme Court cases - Freedom of speech • Schenck v. US • Tinker v. Des Moines • Texas v. Johnson • Morse v. Frederick

3. COURT CASE INDEX CARDS • Name of case & Date • Summary of case: • Two bullets summarizing case • Amendment Question: • Summarize the question facing the court. • Summary of decision: • Two bullets summarizing decision

4. SPEECH – ‘CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TEST’ SCHENCK VS US • Charles Schenck was the Secretary of the Socialist Party of America and was responsible for printing, distributing, and mailing anti-draft pamphlets • For these acts, Schenck was indicted and convicted of violating the Espionage Act of 1917. • Schenck appealed to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that the court decision violated his First Amendment rights.

5. Schenck v. US decision • Schenck lost. • The First Amendment does not protect speech encouraging insubordination • The circumstances of wartime permit greater restrictions on free speech than would be allowable during peacetime. • In the opinion's most famous passage, Justice Holmes sets out the "clear and present danger"test.

6. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Communtiy School District (1969) Mary Beth Tinker and her brother John were opposed to the Vietnam War. They decided to wear black armbands to school as symbols of their objection. When the school administrators learned of this they adopted a policy of asking anyone wearing armbands to remove them. Students who refused would be suspended until they returned to school without the armbands.

7. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Communtiy School District (1969) The Tinkers and three other students wore black armbands to school. Although some students argued the Vietnam issue in the halls, no violence occurred. The five protesting students were suspended from court. Were their rights violated?

8. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) Opinion of the Court: Tinker wins The Supreme Court determined that the students conduct was protected by the first amendment. Their speech did not cause harm or invade rights of others.

9. Texas v. Johnson • Gregory Lee Johnson, then a member of the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade, participated in a political demonstration during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. • The demonstrators were protesting the policies of the Reagan Administration and of certain companies based in Dallas. • They marched through the streets, shouted chants, and held signs outside the offices of several companies. • At one point, another demonstrator handed Johnson an American flag stolen from a flagpole outside one of the targeted buildings. • When the demonstrators reached Dallas City Hall, Johnson poured kerosene on the flag and set it on fire. During the burning of the flag, demonstrators shouted such phrases as, "America, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you, you stand for plunder, you will go under,"

10. Texas v. Johnson decision • The court found that, "Under the circumstances, Johnson's burning of the flag constituted expressive conduct, permitting him to invoke the First Amendment...” • As to the "breach of the peace" justification, however, the court found that "no disturbance of the peace actually occurred or threatened to occur because of Johnson's burning of the flag."

11. Johnson (right) and his lawyer

12. Morse v. Frederick • In 2002, high school principal Deborah Morse suspended 18-year-old Joseph Frederick after he displayed a banner reading "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS" across the street from the school during the 2002 Olympic Torch Relay. • Frederick sued, claiming his constitutional rights to free speech were violated.

13. Decision on Morse v. Frederick • School officials did not violate the First Amendment by confiscating the pro-drug banner and suspending the student responsible for it. • “School speech" doctrine should apply because Frederick's speech occurred "at a school event" • Speech was "reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use"

14. Amendment One Freedom of Religion Supreme Court case

15. Engel v. Vitale - 1962 • The case was brought by the families of public school students in New Hyde Park, New York who complained that the voluntary prayer to "Almighty God" contradicted their religious beliefs. • The plaintiffs argued that opening the school day with such a prayer violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

16. Decision of the court – Engel v. Vitale • The Court ruled that government-written prayers were not to be recited in public schools and were an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause.

17. Amendment One Freedom of Press Supreme Court case

18. NY Times v. US - 1971 • In what became known as the "Pentagon Papers Case," the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials that were leaked from the Defense Department regarding activities in Vietnam. • The President argued that prior restraint was necessary to protect national security.

19. Decision of New York Times v US • New York Times wins • Since publication would not cause an inevitable, direct, and immediate event imperiling the safety of American forces, prior restraint was unjustified.

20. Amendment 2 Supreme Court case DC v. Heller

21. Washington, DC vs Heller - 2007 • The District of Columbia passed legislation barring the registration of handguns, requiring licenses for all pistols, and mandating that all legal firearms must be kept unloaded and disassembled or trigger locked. • DC argued that the Second Amendment applies only to militias, such as the National Guard, and not to private gun ownership.

22. Decision of DC v. Heller • Heller wins • Second amendment protects an individual’s right to own a firearm for personal use.

23. Amendment 4Supreme Court cases Mapp v. Ohio T.L.O. v. New Jersey

24. Mapp v. Ohio - 1961 • When the Cleveland Police Department received a tip that Dollree Mapp and her daughter were harboring a suspected bombing fugitive. • They immediately went to her house and demanded entrance. • Mapp called her attorney and under his advice she refused to give them entry because they did not have a warrant. • Several hours later, more officers came to her door and demanded that they be permitted to enter her house. After Mapp refused, they forcibly opened a door to the house and proceeded in. • Mapp confronted them and demanded to see the search warrant. The police waved a piece of paper in the air (claiming it was the warrant) and Mapp grabbed it and put it down her shirt. The police eventually got the "warrant" back from Mapp. • The officers then cuffed her feet and went on to search her entire house for the fugitive. When they reached her basement they found a trunk containing a small collection of pornographic books, pictures, and photographs. • Mapp said the trunk was left in the basement by a previous tenant and was not aware of its contents. • The officers arrested Mapp for violating an Ohio law which prohibited the possession of obscene material. No fugitive or any evidence of one was ever found at the house. • Mapp’s attorney argued that she should never have been brought to trial because the material evidence resulted from an illegal, warrantless search.

25. Decision of Supreme Court – Mapp v. Ohio • Mapp wins • The court explicitly stated that the exclusionary rule (evidence cannot be used or is inadmissible in court if obtained illegally) applies to states, hence the state cannot use evidence gained by illegal means to convict.

26. New Jersey v. T.L.O - 1985 • On 3/7/1980, a teacher at Piscataway HS in New Jersey found 2 girls smoking in the restroom. She took the girls to the office. • One girl admitted to smoking, T.L.O denied smoking. • The assistant principle asked to see T.L.O’s purse. When he opened it he found cigarettes, rolling papers, small amount of marijuana, plastic bags, substantial amount of $, a list of students that owed $, and 2 letters that implicated her in dealing marijuana.

27. T.L.O. sues using the 4th amendment • T.L.O believes she was a victim of an unlawful search.

28. New Jersey v. T.L.O • The School won • To maintain discipline in school, school officials who have “reasonable suspicion” that a student has done something wrong can conduct a reasonable search. • Police need “probable cause”, school only need “reasonable suspicion”.

29. 5th Amendment cases

30. Escobedo v. Illinois - 1964 • Danny Escobedo's brother-in-law, a convict from Chicago, was shot and killed on the night of January 19, 1960. • Danny Escobedo was arrested without warrant early the next morning and interrogated. • When Escobedo asked to speak to his attorney, the police refused, explaining that although he was not formally charged as of yet, he was in custody and could not leave. • His attorney went to the police station and repeatedly asked to see his client, but was repeatedly refused access. • Police and prosecutors proceeded to interrogate Escobedo for fourteen and a half hours and repeatedly refused his request to speak with his attorney. • While being interrogated, Escobedo made statements implicating his knowledge of the crime. After conviction for murder, Escobedo appealed on the basis of being denied the right to counsel.

31. Escobedo v. Illinois - 1964 Decision of the court: Escobedo wins. The Supreme Court overturned Escobedo's conviction (By a 5-4 vote) and recognized a suspect's right to an attorney during police interrogation.

32. Miranda v. Arizona - 1963 • An 18-year-old girl was kidnapped and raped early on the morning of March 3, 1963 in Phoenix, Arizona. The attacker took her out to the desert, raped her, and then dropped her off near her home. • Coincidentally, the following week she saw the car used in the attack, and recorded the license plate number. The police picked up the car owner's boyfriend, one Ernest Miranda who fit the description of the girl's attacker almost perfectly. • The victim did not positively identify Miranda as her assailant, but stated that he looked most like him of all the men in the line-up. The police took him into an interrogation room and told him falsely that he had been positively identified. After two hours of questioning, Miranda confessed. He was appointed a public defender.

33. Two hours later, the officers emerged from the interrogation room with a written confession signed by Miranda.  The confession had a paragraph typed at the top which stated the confession was made "with full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me." Miranda v. Arizona - 1963 Ernesto Miranda

34. Miranda v. Arizona • Miranda wins. • The state of Arizona, by obtaining a confession from Miranda without having informed him of his right to have a lawyer present, had violated his rights under the Fifth Amendment regarding self-incrimination.Miranda’s conviction was overturned.

35. 6th Amendment case

36. Gideon v. Wainwright - 1963 • Gideon was charged in a Florida state court with a felony for breaking and entering. • He lacked funds and was unable to hire a lawyer to prepare his defense. • When he requested the court to appoint an attorney for him, the court refused, stating that it was only obligated to appoint counsel to poor defendants in capital cases. • Gideon defended himself in the trial; he was convicted by a jury and the court sentenced him to five years in a state prison.

37. Gideon v. Wainwright - 1963 • In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that Gideon had a right to be represented by a court-appointed attorney. • In this case the Court found that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of counsel was a fundamental right, essential to a fair trial, which should be made applicable to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

38. 8th Amendment case

39. Furman v. Georgia 1972 • Furman attempted to burglarize a house in Georgia. When the owner of the house awoke, Furman tried to flee. According to his testimony, he dropped his gun, which went off accidentally. As it hit the ground, it fired and killed the house’s owner. Furman was found guilty of murder. He was given the death penalty. • Furman was tried for murder and was found guilty based largely on his own statement • Was the jury’s actions ‘cruel and unusual’?

40. Furman v. Georgia 1972 • Court Decision: The death penalty is cruel and unusual. The murder was not planned or deliberate.

41. Amendment 9 case

42. Roe v. Wade - 1971 • Roe, a Texas resident, sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion. Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant woman's life. • Roe sues Wade (county district attorney) using 9th amendment – right to privacy.

43. Roe v. Wade Decision: Roe wins; abortion legal First Trimester – decision to abort left to mother in consultation with her doctor – state cannot stop an abortion except to promote safety of the procedure Second Trimester –States can regulate the procedure, but cannot stop the abortion. Third Trimester – after “viability” (after 6 months or >) state can prohibit abortion to protect human life EXCEPT when abortion would preserve the life or health of the mother