2. Marbury vs MadisonMarbury vs Madison
When:1803
Case: Last minute appointments were never
finalized, so was Marbury entitled to his
appointment still?
Ruling: Unanimous; Madison won on the ruling
that when the Constitution conflicts with an act
of legislature the act is invalid.
3. Engel vs VitaleEngel vs Vitale
When: 1961
Case: New York authorized prayer at the
beginning of school. Engel felt this violated the
establishment of religion in the first
amendment.
Ruling: 6 for Engel, 1 against. Engel won on the
premise that the requirement was a violation of
the constitution.
4. Wallace vs JaffreeWallace vs Jaffree
When: 1984
Case: Jaffree argued that the Alabama law
permitting prayer in school violated the first
amendment’s establishment clause.
Ruling: 6 for Jaffree, 3 against. Jaffree won on
the premise that the prayer law was
unconstitutional. Very similar to Engel v. Vitale.
5. Tinker vs Des MoinesTinker vs Des Moines
When: 1968
Case: John Tinker, Mary Beth Tinker,
Christopher Echardt, and parents decided to
protest Vietnam war by wearing black
armbands. They were asked to remove them
and refused and were suspended from school.
Ruling: 7 for Tinker, 2 against. Tinker won on
the premise that being unable to wear the
armband is a violation of the first amendment
concerning freedom of speech.
6. NY Times vs United StatesNY Times vs United States
When: 1970
Case: Nixon administration tried preventing
New York times and Washington Post from
publishing classified information from Vietnam.
Nixon claimed this was a matter of national
security.
Ruling: 6 for NY Times, 3 against. NY Times
won on the premise that the nixon
administration was trying to violate the first
amendment concerning freedom of speech.
7. New Jersey vs TLONew Jersey vs TLO
When: 1983
Case: TLO was a student accused of smoking in
the girls bathroom at school. When searched;
marijuana and drug paraphernalia was found.
Ruling: 6 for New Jersey, 3 against. New Jersey
won because having probable cause on school
grounds mean the search was not in violation of
the fourth or fourteenth amendments.
8. Mapp vs OhioMapp vs Ohio
When: 1960
Case: Mapp convicted for ownership of obscene
materials discovered during police search.
Ruling: 6 for Mapp, 3 against. Mapp won not
on the premise of freedom of speech but instead
on the fourth amendment stating all search and
seizure evidence unconstitutionally obtained is
inadmissible in a court of law.
9. Betts vs BradyBetts vs Brady
When: 1941
Case: Betts was convicted for robbery and was
unable to afford counsel. When he asked the
court to provide him with one, the judge denied
his request.
Ruling: The ruling was that the denial of
counsel was not a violation of fourteenth or
sixth amendment.
10. Gideon vs WainwrightGideon vs Wainwright
When: 1962
Case: Gideon was convicted for breaking and
entering and requested the court to provide him
counsel and the court denied his request.
Ruling: Unanimously Gideon; Due to the 14th
amendment state courts are required to provide
counsel for defendants unable to afford one.
11. Escobedo vs IllinoisEscobedo vs Illinois
When: 1963
Case: Escobedo was arrested and questioned.
The police questioning him refused his
requested to see his lawyer and eventually
incriminated himself.
Ruling: 5 for Escobedo, 4 against. Escobedo
won on the premise that his rights were denied
and he wasn’t informed of his other
constitutional rights to remain silent.
12. Miranda vs ArizonaMiranda vs Arizona
When: 1965
Case: This was a joint case concerning whether
people’s rights were being violated during
police investigations due to not being notified
of their rights.
Ruling: 5 for Miranda, 4 against. Miranda won
on the premise that the court cannot use
statements from interrogations unless the
person is notified of their rights prior.
13. Griswold vs ConnecticutGriswold vs Connecticut
When: 1964
Case: Griswold provided counsel to married
couples for birth control and was convicted for
violating the Connecticut law that criminalized
offering help to married people with preventing
conception.
Ruling: 7 for Griswold, 2 against. Griswold won
due to a combination of first, third, fourth, and
ninth amendments create the right to privacy in
marriage.
14. Roe vs WadeRoe vs Wade
When: 1971
Case: Roe wished to have an abortion but
Texas law prohibited abortions unless the
mother is in jeopardy.
Ruling: 7 for Roe, 2 against. Roe won by the
same standards in Griswold v. Connecticut
because the constitution protects the rights to
privacy during the first trimester. This ruling
affected 46 states.
15. Dred Scott vs SanfordDred Scott vs Sanford
When: 1856
Case: Dred Scott was a slave living in a free
state and therefore tried to sue Missouri for his
freedom when he returned to the slave state.
Ruling: 7 for Sanford, 2 against. Sanford won
because under articles III and IV only citizens
of the USA can be citizens of a state. Also
decided the Missouri Compromise was
unconstitutional.
16. Plessy vs FergusonPlessy vs Ferguson
When: 1895
Case: Louisiana enacted a law requiring
separate train cars for blacks and whites. Plessy
who was 7/8 caucasian sat in the white section
and pulled a Rosa Parks and was arrested.
Ruling: 7 for Ferguson, 1 against. The state law
was in constitutional boundaries based on the
separate but equal doctrine.
17. Brown vs Board of EducationBrown vs Board of Education
When: 1952
Case: Public schools were segregated. Brown
felt that the segregation based on race deprived
minority children of the laws guaranteed by the
14th amendment.
Ruling: Unanimously. Brown won on the idea
that intangible factors supported inequality by
causing the minorities to feel inferior.
18. US vs NixonUS vs Nixon
When: 1974
Case: This was the case concerning the
watergate affair based off of audio tapes. Nixon
claimed it was his executive privilege to
withhold information that was to secure
national interest.
Ruling: Unanimous. The United States won
based on the fact that presidents are not
immune from judicial review. The court
ordered that Nixon must obey the subpoena.
19. Schenck vs USSchenck vs US
When: 1918
Case: Schenck was charged with conspiracy for
spreading mail encouraging peaceful protests
against the draft. He was accused of attempting
to cause insubordination in the military and in
military recruitment.
Ruling: Unanimous. The United States won due
to the circumstances. The freedom of speech
argument was dismissed.
20. Bakke vs California Board ofBakke vs California Board of
RegentsRegents
When: 1977
Case: Bakke had applied to the University of
California Medical School at Davis twice and
got rejected twice. His scores exceeded those of
the minorities who had been admitted so he
argued he was rejected based on race not
academics.
Ruling: 5 for Bakke, 4 against. Bakke won
however the court made progress in both
affirmative action and minimizing white
oppression.
21. Swann vs Charlotte Meck SchoolsSwann vs Charlotte Meck Schools
When:1970
Case: This furthered Brown vs Board of
Education with the issue of segregation in the
school system. Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools
had about 14,000 students that were all black
attending all black schools.
Ruling: Unanimous. Charlotte-Mecklenburg
won and guidelines for segregated schools were
put in place.
22. Korematsu vs USKorematsu vs US
When: 1944
Case: Japanese were excluded from areas
during WWII where national security was in
danger. Korematsu violated this order referred
to as the Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34 by
the army.
Ruling: 6 for US, 3 against. The United States
won on the premise that the need to prevent
espionage was more important than his rights.
23. Abington Schools vs SchemppAbington Schools vs Schempp
When: 1962
Case: Bible reading was a part of the school
system where students were required to read ten
Bible verses and recite the Lord’s Prayer unless
excused with a parent note. Murray claimed
this to be a violation of the 1st and 14th
amendments concerning freedom of religion.
Ruling: 8 for Schempp, 1 against. The court
ruled that the school system was in fact in
violation of these rights.
24. Minersville vs GobitisMinersville vs Gobitis
When: 1939
Case: Two students were expelled from public
school for refusing to salute the flag. They were
refusing due to their religious beliefs as
Jehovahs Witnesses.
Ruling: 8 for Minersville, 1 against. Basically
saluting the flag brings unity to the nation and
was the basis of national security which is the
stupidest thing I’ve ever heard of.
25. Hazelwood Schools vs KuhlmeirHazelwood Schools vs Kuhlmeir
When: 1987
Case: Two articles in the school newspaper were
said to be inappropriate by the principal. The
students felt removing the articles violated their
right of freedom of speech.
Ruling: 5 for Hazelwood, 3 against. Schools are
not required to promote certain student speech.
26. In re GaultIn re Gault
When: 1967
Case: A 15 year old was taken into custody
without notifying the parents or providing any
details on the hearings and convictions.
Ruling: Juveniles being charged still have the
same rights as adults and must be notified of
these rights such as right to counsel and right to
remain silent.
27. Baker vs CarrBaker vs Carr
When: 1960
Case: The law to apportion the seats was
ignored and restraining economic growth.
Ruling: 6 for Baker, 2 against.
28. McCulloch vs MarylandMcCulloch vs Maryland
When: 1819
Case: A cashier at the new bank refused to pay
the taxes that were put into place
Ruling: Unanimous. McCulloch won on the
premise that Maryland can not tax instruments
of the national government in the execution of
constitutional powers.
29. Leandro vs NCLeandro vs NC
When: 1994
Case: The Leandro family wanted equal
education for children and that a child’s
education should not be based on the wealth of
the community they live in.
Ruling: Every child has the right to a basic
education however it is not the State’s job to
fund that education.
30. Texas vs JohnsonTexas vs Johnson
When: 1988
Case: Gregory Lee Johnson burned an
American flag as a means of protest against
Reagan administration policies. Johnson was
tried and convicted under a Texas law
outlawing flag desecration.
Ruling: 5 for Johnson, 4 against. His expression
of burning the flag was protected by his 1st
amendment rights.
31. West Virginia vs BarnetteWest Virginia vs Barnette
When: 1942
Case: The West Virginia Board of Education
ordered that the "flag salute" must occur at any
activity in public schools. If a student did not
participate, they could be expelled or charged
with delinquency.
Ruling: 6 for Barnette, 3 against. This was a
violation of the 1st amendment rights.
32. Gratz vs BullingerGratz vs Bullinger
When: 2002
Case: When Jennifer Gratz and Patrick
Hamacher applied to the University of
Michigan, they were both rejected even though
they were qualified. The University then
admitted to using race as a factor in the
admission process.
Ruling: 6 for Gratz, 3 against. The school was
in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
33. Katz vs USKatz vs US
When: 1967
Case: When federal agents found out that Katz
may have been communicating gambling
information to other states, they bugged the
public telephone booth that Katz typically used.
He was convicted based on his recordings
Ruling: 7 for Katz, 1 against. The evidence had
to be thrown out because it was a violation of
the 4th amendment.
34. Reynolds vs SimsReynolds vs Sims
When: 1963
Case: Each country was allowed one senator.
However, population ratios varied up to forty
one to one.
Ruling: 8 for Sims, 1 against. Many thought it
violated the Equal Protection Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment by not taking into
account population variances but it wasn’t in
violation.
35. Gibbons vs OgdenGibbons vs Ogden
When: 1824
Case: It caused states to charge large fees to
operate steamboats for out-of-state individuals,
and it created a monopoly. A steamboat owner
challenged this monopoly and brought into
question whether or not New York had
overstepped its bounds and exercised powers of
the Congress.
Ruling: Unanimously Gibbons
36. Olmstead vs USOlmstead vs US
When: 1927
Case: Roy Olmstead had been suspected of
bootlegging. Federal agents decided that to get
proof they would wiretapped the basement of
Olmstead's building and areas near his home.
Green vs. United States and McInnis vs. United
States were both decided along with this case.
Olmstead argued that wiretapping his private
conversations were in violation of his Fourth
and Fifth Amendment rights.
Ruling: 4 for Olmstead, 5 against.
37. Gitlow vs NYGitlow vs NY
When: 1922
Case: Socialist Gitlow was arrested for anarchy
for distributing his “left-wing manifesto.” Since
no action came from it he felt he had no right to
be charged.
Ruling: New York won on the premise that it is
the states right to prevent a disturbance in
peace.
