The United States Supreme Court Cases

The United States Supreme Court Cases
The United States Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices. At its discretion, and within certain
guidelines established by Congress, the Supreme Court each year hears a limited number of the cases it is asked to decide. Those cases may begin in
the federal or state courts, and they usually involve important questions about the Constitution or federal law. Established by the Constitution within
Article III, the Supreme Court was declared the highest federal court in the United States as well as the highest body within the judicial branch of
government. With these prestigious titles, the Supreme Court possesses final appellate jurisdiction. They also have the power to exercise supervisory
jurisdiction over the lower courts. The Justices of the Supreme Court are chosen and then nominated by the President. After that, they must be approved
by the majority vote of the members within the Senate. When appointed, the Justices serve until death, retirement, or impeachment. The average term
of a Supreme Court Justice, however, is most commonly 15 years. The Supreme Court assumed the responsibility of having a new role as guardian of
the rights and liberties of the individual in the twentieth century. The history surrounding the Supreme Court helps to identify the country's economic
development, alteration in political views, and evolution of federal structure. The Supreme Court deals with a significant number of cases each year
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Notable Supreme Court Cases
Throughout the history of the Supreme Court, there have been numerous notable court cases. However, none of these would have been possible
without Maybury v. Madison. It occurred in 1803, when John Adams decided to appoint several justices at the last minute. Not all of these letters
were delivered, and one of the judges, Maybury decided to sue Madison. Madison won, and this court case creates Judicial Review. In 1819,
McCullogh v. Maryland took place. McCullogh, a business manager, is taxed twice, once at a state level, and once at a federal level. Thinking this
is unjust, McCullogh sues Maryland and McCullogh wins. This court case declares national supremacy over banking. Another important court case,
Gibbons v. Ogden, happened in 1824. Ogden controls a ferry business in New York. However, because of the Eerie Canal, Ogden can travel to other
states, which would be interstate trade. Gibbons, a person also wanting to create an industry in transportation, decides to sue Ogden. Gibbons wins,
and this case creates national supremacy over interstate trade. In 1854, Scott v. Sanford took place. Scott, a slave to the Emerson family, traveled to
Minnesota with John Emerson. While there, his owner died and the court declared him free. However, at the Circuit of Appeals, it was ruled Scott
was still property of the Emersons'. This decision stood, which declared that slaves are property. This was one infuriating cause of the Civil War.
Plessy v. Ferguson occurred in 1896.

Marshall Supreme Court Case
Legislation passed under former Chief Justice John Marshall would continue the Federalists agenda to define a strong central government while
diminishing state level powers. Arguably the most important Supreme Court case in history, Marbury v. Madison's (1803) presided over the
commissions of several judges appointed in the final hours of the Adams administration. Chief Justice Marshall would deny the petition and writ,
claiming the court did not have the power to issue them however; he awarded the plaintiffs their commissions. As result Marshall's decision established
judicial review allowing federal courts to nullify acts of Congress that violate the Constitution. Despite the immediate limitations Marshall place on the
court his actions would... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The case of Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819), questioned what under the contract clause was preserved by the Constitution and additionally
disputed states assemblies jurisdiction to alter a charter. In 1769, the King of England charted Dartmouth College as a private university in 1816 the
state of New Hampshire passed several laws to revise the charter to a public university. Furthermore, the change in charter would modify the board of
trustees; as a result, the trustees filed a lawsuit claiming the newly passed New Hampshire laws were in breech of the Constitution. The court ruled in
agreement with Dartmouth; the laws violated the Constitution, which prohibited a state from changing a contract. Marshall delivered the opinion
writing,"...that the legislative of a State shall pass no 'law impairing the obligation of contract." The courts verdict limited the power of states rights
including the power to obstruct charters while simultaneously boosting the powers of the contract clause. In conclusion, the decision asserted the
Supreme Court could nullify any laws they found unconstitutional increasing the powers of the executive

Supreme Court Case Study
According to the Constitution, how do Congress and the President balance the power of the Supreme Court?
The U.S. Congress in relation to the president and Supreme Court has the role of chief legislative body of the United States. The Constitution's
Framers built a system in which three powerful branches of the government, using a series of checks and balances, could limit each other's power.
1803 – Marbury v. Madison Federalist William Marbury and many others were appointed to positions by outgoing President John Adams.James
Madison took office, and Madison chose not to honor them, Marbury and the others invoked an Act of Congress and sued to get their appointed
positions.Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, An act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void. It was the first time the Supreme Court
declared unconstitutional a law that had been passed by Congress.
1857 – Dred Scott v. Sandford This decision established that slaves were not citizens of theUnited States and were not protected under the US
Constitution. Dred Scott and his wife Harriet sued for their freedom in Missouri, a slave state, after having lived ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The Court decided against Plessy 7–1 and Justice Henry Billings Brown wrote, "The argument also assumes that social prejudice may be overcome
by legislation and that equal rights cannot be secured except by an enforced commingling of the two races... if the civil and political rights of both
races be equal, one cannot be inferior to the other civilly or politically. If one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States
cannot put them upon the same plane." Plessy was overturned by the Brown v. Board of Education

Many students believe that they have unlimited rights, however this isn't true. In school settings, school policies can limit the rights of the students to
make a safer and more orderly learning environment. These policies don't completely take away the rights, they merely limit these rights, even if
students feel differently. These are some examples of limited rights in school systems. "Students don't lose their constitutional rights at school." This
was said in the court case of Tinker vs Des Moines. This Supreme Court case dealt with freedom of speech. In this case, students wore armbands to
protest the Vietnam War. The students were then suspended. The parents of these students then sued the school for violating the students and the case
went to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the students saying that their free speech rights were violated. (http:/
/www.uscourts.gov/about–federal–courts/educational–resources/supreme–court–landmarks/tinker–v–des–moines–podcast) ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In this case, Matthew Fraser was suspended from Bethel High School for three days. He had made made a very inappropriate speech while nominating
a classmate for student elected office. Now switching gears, we go into the Fourth Amendment in the Court Case of Board ofEducation of Independent
School District of Pottawatomie County vs Earls. In this court case, the school district was giving random drug tests to student athletes. The students
believed that this violated their Fourth Amendment rights of no unreasonable searches and seizures. Sounds reasonable right? Wrong. The Supreme
Court said that this did not violate the rights of these

Supreme Court Case Analysis
Aroosa Noor Question 1 : The supreme court of the United States is a court of last resort, it's the highest court in the USA, and there is no other
court with higher authority. All cases that reach the Supreme Court have been heard from the decisions of lower courts across the nation. Once a
case works its way through lower courts, a party can petition if they want to have their case heard by the Supreme Court, but Supreme Court is
extremely picky regarding cases. In order for a supreme court to hear the case, 4 of the 9 justices of the court must agree to hear the case. If judicial
writ is granted, the time frame for the parties is set. The petitioner has 45 days to file their brief on the merits, which explains their argument to the
court.... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Geographic jurisdiction is court's authority over a specific area, or a state. Contrast geographic is like at a certain level of court's a law can be
either legal or illegal where at federal states it could be opposite. . Subject matter jurisdiction included courts of general justification and courts of
limited jurisdiction. Limited jurisdiction is responsible for the early stage of felonies. General jurisdiction is without any restrictions. Yes, cases can
be tried in multiple jurisdictions, as explained in defense lawyer federal crime, an example of that is, a victim of the crime might live in another state
from where the crime taken place, a defendant can be tied in the same case at different courts. if convicted state and federally, a prison sentence is
served in the state prison and then federal

Well first of all, the supreme court is the highest judicial court in a country or state. "The highest federal court in the US, consisting of nine justices
and taking judicial precedence over all other courts in the nation" (wikipedia.com). The supreme courts job is simply the final judge. In all cases
involving laws of congress, or the constitution, the supreme court gets to make the final judgement. However, it is not all–powerful. The power of the
supreme court is limited by two other branches of government. (scholastic.com). Now how do people get a job as a justice of the supreme court?
Well the president gets to appoint each justice. How do the justices decide to hear a case or not? Not just any case can be heard by the supreme court
so what makes the cases the supreme court does hear special? The cases that the supreme court hears are ones that deal with issues with the federal
law. or if they fall within the limits of the federal government the supreme court might decide to hear them. If a case only has to do with county or state
laws than this case will most likely stay within the states jurisdiction, or the states court system. The supreme court is the very last step to most cases.

A Landmark Supreme Court Case
A landmark Supreme Court case is one in which a precedence is set and there is an impact on society. There are many reasons for the importance
of landmark cases and the studying of such cases. Some of these reasons are to study how the judicial branch works, try to understand how
decisions made in the judicial branch affects laws and everyday life, and predict how current issues and cases will be affected by past decisions
(The Judicial Learning Center, 2012). There are many examples of Supreme Court cases that are considered to be a landmark, but one example is
Texas vs. Johnson. Outside of the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, many people protested President Ronald Reagan's
policies. Among the protestors was one man named Gregory Lee Johnson. This man was so upset by the policies of the President that he burned an
American flag in protest. By doing this, a statute in Texas was violated. This statute prevented the desecration of an American flag if it could
possibly anger other people amongst the protest. Johnson was arrested and charged with this violation. He was later tried in court and convicted, but
he made an appeal stating that by burning the flag he was expressing his rights of "symbolic speech" which are protected by the first amendment
(uscourts.gov). The definition of symbolic speech is the same as a term called "speech plus". This is a form of expression in which behavior is used
by itself or in coordination with written or spoken

Supreme Court Majority Case
To reiterate, the Supreme Court majority in the case, properly and professionally interpreted the Bill of Rights regarding the right to privacy. It is
logical and imperative that the citizens are given a sense of liberty when it comes to their personal lives and this does not affect another citizen
directly. If there was no sense of privacy, then we would live in a country where the government would hold all the power and eventually control our
lives. This is most definitely not what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
The purpose of those documents was to limit the government from having all the power over its citizens which is why the colonies decided to break
from the tyranny of the British. Had the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Connecticut law, the government would have had the power to now... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At the time, many states had laws for the use of contraceptives by unmarried women but the fact this was a married couple I feel helped the majority
to rule in their favor and thus provide a basis for future cases governing any clause on privacy to the citizens. This plus the fact by the 1950's,
Connecticut and Massachusetts were the only two states which still had such statues and eventually the laws would have changed the way those states
were governing their citizens. The Constitution does propose a process by which it may be amended and yes the process should be followed because
it's what's written and this is the law of the land. The Supreme Court did not make a change to the Constitution but merely interpreted it, to the best of

Introduction In the summer of 2015, history was made in the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court had made, with a
5–4 majority, a controversial ruling decreeing that denying equal recognition to same–sex couples was in violation of the Equal Protections Clause of
the Fourteenth Amendment. Those on the minority cited concerns of judicial restraint, the connection between marriage and procreation, and whether or
not marriage is a Constitutional issue in the first place. Nevertheless, equal recognition for same–sex couples became the law of the land.
History
James Obergefell and his partner John Arthur were legally married in the state of Maryland in 2013. Nevertheless, not all states recognized same–sex ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The director of the Ohio Department of Health, Theodore Wymyslo, appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the decision.
Obergefell subsequently filed a Petition for the Writ of Certiorari with the Supreme Court (ACLU Ohio).
Philosophy and Jurisprudence: The Writ of Certiorari On January 16, 2014, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, and hence agreed to hear the case,
issuing the following statement:
The cases are consolidated and the petitions for writs of certiorari are granted limited to the following questions: Does the Fourteenth Amendment
require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage
between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out–of–state? (Supreme Court of the United States, 2015
Jan.)
Thus, the case would revolve around the Equal Protections Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Obergefell v. Hodges would focus on answering the
second question: whether or not the Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when the
marriage was performed in a different state.
Oral Argumentation Mary Bonauto, winner of the MacArthur Genius Grant and a well–versed civil rights lawyer represented Obergefell (Spangler
2015). The plaintiffs argued that to deny the right

Supreme Court Case Summary
United States Supreme Court: WHITMAN vs. AM. TRUCKING ASS'NS, 531 U.S. 457 This specific court case revolves around the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), specifically regarding particulate matter in the ozone layer. Within the CAA, it states that the Environmental
Protection Agency must set a standard on the quality of ambient air so that public health is protected. This section 109 (b) (1) of the act was
challenged in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and declared it unconstitutional to delegate Congress to the EPA so that they can officially set a quality
of air standard. They stated that it violated the Constitution in Article 1 Section 1 due to it delegating congressional actions to the EPA, which it cannot
do under law.... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Subsequently to this, carbon dioxide emissions were set to be regulated under the EPA as well due to its effect on the surrounding biota and abiota,
primarily concerning motor vehicle gas emissions and other industrial generators. Many power companies disputed the EPA's regulation and question
the legality of them. Once brought to the attention of the D.C. Circuit Court, the power company's claims against the EPA were rejected by all the
present judges, yet it still was accepted by the Supreme Court for review. Scalia's opinion on this case deems the most interesting. He stated that the
CAA has requirements specified for any such pollutant sources that can emit up to 250 tons per year; however, because the pollutant sources were
previously specified in the past to encompass only air pollutants that were regulated, greenhouse gases were not affiliated with this. The EPA was able
to navigate around this, but their proposed plan was still objected against. Overall, the court did gave right to the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases, but
they were to be regulated as a pollution source that is subject to regulation. Consequently to Scalia, Breyer, Ginsburg, and others stated that the EPA
should hone the ability to broadly define any air pollutant; this would allow them to

Supreme Court Case Essay
1. What is the role of the Supreme Court?
Echoing my forum statement of week 2, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) was created by, and receives its authority from Article III
of the United States (U.S.) Constitution in 1787 and ratified in 1789 [1]. As head of the U.S. Governments judicial branch, the role of SCOTUS is to
enforce the Rule of Law of the U.S. Constitution, seeing that the lower courts do not undermine the Constitution and the freedoms and liberties it
provides to the citizenry; they are the ultimate arbiters in judicial cases. SCOTUS is comprised of a Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices, who are
all appointed by the President of the United States, but must be confirmed by Congress, and serve a life term until they choose to retire, resign or are
removed due to gross neglect or legal misconduct. The SCOTUS also acts a check and balance to the President and Congress, ensuring they do not
abuse their authority by exercising their ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The authority of judicial review by SCOTUS is not actually defined by the U.S. Constitution, but rather inferred by the Constitution's framework,
design and the history of case law heard by SCOTUS. Judicial Review doctrine was solidified by comprehensive consent across all legal spheres after
the case of Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) [2]. This case became a landmark verdict, establishing the definite separation between the branches
of government, not just in theory, but in practical application when SCOTUS ruled an act of Congress unconstitutional [2]. 3. Explain the two theories
of constitutional interpretation, the "living constitution" and "originalist". Which theory do you believe is the correct theory to

With Article III, the founding fathers established the Supreme Court, also called SCOTUS, to interpret the Constitution. Over time, and after reviewing
multiple decisions, SCOTUS increased their powers and authority. From cases such as Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) and Griswold v.
Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), SCOTUS assumed the privilege of judicial review and jurisdiction over penumbral state rights. Supreme Court
skeptics claim that the justices are undemocratic, and the Framers recognized their dissent. In response, they developed measures to limit judicial
expansion and preserve their political independence. Because of the additions, the Supreme Court should retain their power to overturn state laws. To
start, the... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
On the contrary, historically, in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819), the Court used their power to determine Maryland's constitutionality of
taxing a national bank. Prior to the case, the creation of a bank was not a power directly stated in the Constitution, but a penumbra right drawn from the
Constitution. Likewise, the state believed they held the implied right to tax a national institution when addressing the right to tax businesses within
their borders. In the end, after considering both sides of the argument, the Court unanimously ruled in favor of McCulloch and found that Maryland
could not tax a federal institution (pbs.org). The result gave SCOTUS the right to "control the constitution and laws of the respective states," (pbs.org)
including implied rights. Since previous rulings allowed the Court to review state laws not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the modern–day
Court should follow. Ultimately, theUnited States' Supreme Court is "the highest court in the land" and "plays an essential role" in upholding the
Constitution (uscourts.gov). Nonetheless, the Court and judges face flaws for "if men were angels, no government would be necessary" (James
Madison), but the founding fathers carefully crafted the system to allow "life, liberty, and justice for

William Marbury was one of President Adams' "midnight appointments." All of the required paperwork, and procedures were completed in time to
secure his appointment as a justice of the peace for Washington, D.C. However, secretary of state John Marshall, a midnight appointee to a judicial
position as well. Failed to deliver his commission. Upon becoming president, Jefferson ordered his Secretary of State James Madison not to deliver the
commission. Under authority of the Judiciary Act of 1789, Marbury sued to ask the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to force Madison to
deliver the commission.
ISSUES: Does Marbury have a right to this commission? If he has a right, is there a solution in the law to realize it?
HOLDING:
1) Yes... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Constitution is the "supreme law of the land". It establishes "certain limits" on the power of the government it creates. This includes the Congress.
"a legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law." When a case comes to the Supreme Court, the Court must decide that case according to the
law. If "ordinary" legislation conflicts with the limits imposed on government by the Constitution, the fundamental law must govern the ordinary
Otherwise; the Constitution would not limit government. Courts have this power because they decide cases under law; judges take an oath to uphold
the Constitution, and this is part of that function. Following these principles, Marbury cannot receive a mandamus from the Court. The Constitution
creates two categories of jurisdiction for the Supreme Court, original and appellate. Congress, under Article III, has the power to regulate appellate
jurisdiction; however, no power is given for the regulation of original jurisdiction. The provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that added matters of
mandamus to the original jurisdiction of the Court, therefore, is beyond the power given to Congress by the people in the Constitution. Having no
legitimate jurisdiction over this matter, the Court cannot provide Marbury with the remedy he

Supreme Court Case Simulation
On June 26th, 2013, a Supreme Court case occurred dealing with a same–sex couple, Mrs. Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer. It was until they both got
married in Ontario, Canada in 2007 and returned to the U.S to a home they had in New York City. Later in their years, Thea had passed away in
2009. Thea left the home estate to Windsor. The estate tax exemption was freely opened to Windsor to claim from the surviving spouses. Although,
Windsor was not entitled to the estate tax discharge, because by federal law, was sought as the Defense ofMarriage Act, bypasses the definition of a
same–sex partner and 'spouse'. Even after hearing that, Windsor paid her taxes for it, but eventually filed a suit to battle the constitutionality of the
endowment. To the situation occurring, theUnited States District Courts as well as the Court of Appeals has reigned that the federal law to ... Show
The argument was toward the challenge of the Defense of Marriage Act, which was an issue between the states Federal sales tax. The argument
throughout the representatives, in a sense, was questionable and logical. During the argument, Paul Clement, an Attorney for Bipartisan, and Justice
Sotomayor, a Supreme Court of Justice Lawyer, were fighting to what local states definesame–sex marriage and how the federal laws pertaining to the
taxes define whom the client of a spouse should pay the sales & property taxes. It was until more of the representatives and lawyers to comment into
this argument about this situation.
The executive branch agreed upon the DOMA being unconstitutional about how they took this situation of same–sex partnership & spouses. Although
the Court has considered whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case, it is important to certify the federal laws to other states on same–sex spouses as
the constitutional decisions of the citizens of the United States have, relating to our civil

Supreme Court Cases Essay
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs. Sawyer Also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, it was a United States Supreme Court decision that
limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under
Article Two of the US Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. The Majority decision was that the President had no power
to act except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress. Marbury vs. Madison: A landmark case in
United States Law and the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States,... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Plessey boarded a car of the East Louisiana Railroad that was designated by whites for use by white patrons only. Although Plessey was one–eighth
black and seven–eighths white, under Louisiana state law he was classified as an African–American, and thus required to sit in the "colored" car. When
Plessey refused to leave the white car and move to the colored car, he was arrested and jailed. The Court rejected Plessey's arguments based on the
Thirteenth Amendment, seeing no way in which the Louisiana statute violated it. In addition, the majority of the Court rejected the view that the
Louisiana law implied any inferiority of blacks, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Instead, it contended that the law separated the two races as
a matter of public policy. Smith v. Allwright: An important decision of the United States Supreme Court with regard to voting rights and, by extension,
racial desegregation. Lonnie E. Smith, a black voter in Texas, sued for the right to vote in a primary election being conducted by the Democratic Party.
The law he challenged allowed the party to enforce a rule requiring all voters in its primary to be white. At this point in history, the Republican Party
was so weak in the South that most Southern elections were decided by the outcome of the Democratic primary. Southern States claimed that the
Democratic Party was a private organization, while Smith said that the law in question essentially disenfranchised him by

Supreme Court Case Paper
Let me start off by saying that this case in my opinion, was particularly difficult for me to understand and decipher what I was actually reading. That
being said, I think the main issue in this case is whether the parties intended that a construction and repurchase clause should constitute as a covenant. A
covenant is a formal written agreement between two parties for the performance of some action, that runs with the land. These actions were to be
enforceable by a specific performance, or a future interest. In this case the construction of an office building on a condition subsequent, which is later
enforceable only under the Real Property and Procedure Law ("RPAPL") В§ 1953. The court case was on an appeal about whether the parties had
intended that a construction with a repurchase clause should be enforceable by a specific performance or a future interest on a condition subsequent.
The court held that the parties intentions was that the obligation found on the deed sale constitutes for a covenant that... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Without the re–entry authorization Suffolk Business Center did not have the grounds based on the loose wording of the deed of sale to reconvene
the property. The court denied the purchasers cross motion and remitted the case for further resolution to the Supreme Court. In my opinion the court
case went exactly as it should have. The things I would have done differently would have been that I would have had an attorney double check the
wording of the deed. With any deed the right to repurchase land from grantee on the grantor's behalf takes proper wording in order for the proper
course of action to be taken. If Suffolk Business Center had a re–entry authorization with a repurchase clause that was properly worded they would
have been able to purchase the property back for original purchase

Supreme Court Cases In Schools
Ever since it was ratified the constitution was said to be the supreme law of the land. It has been the deciding factor for court cases ever since it was
written. The constitution also contains certain rights we are guaranteed. Ever since the constitution was written there has been problems interpreting
what exactly these rights allow us to do. But one question that really hasn't even really been answered is whether students are allowed to all these
rights in a school building. The Supreme Court has been working with cases that concern student's rights in school for a long time most profoundly in
the 20th century. I'm now going to talk about some of the better known cases and explain them. This first case is the first case that was a big deal
across the nation and perhaps the most profound... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
New Jersey vs TLO is another landmark Supreme Court case that deals with certain rights students can have at the school building. Terry (TLO) was
found smoking in the school bathroom. School officials then searched her clothes and belongings for marijuana and other tobacco products. When they
found marijuana and other illegal drugs the school called the police and she was arrested. She then went to court and the courts found her guilty of
possessing and selling marijuana. She then appealed her case saying the school violated her 4th amendment right. The 4th amendment guarantees the
right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Supreme Court ruled
against TLO and in favor of the school. The court said students have the right to privacy but that must be balanced with the schools job to maintain a
place where students can come to learn. The bottom line of this Supreme Court case is that your belongings can be searched in the school building but
not arbitrarily or without good

Supreme Court Cases In The Harlowell Case
The United States Supreme Court's decision in Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 required that state courts permit the defendant to seek the counsel of an
attorney. The court's decision in the Powell case required that free counsel be given to indigent defendants faced with serious federal offenses. It did not
mandate that all indigent persons be given free counsel, only if it was thought that the trial verdict would be unfair without representation. It was not
until Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972) that the Supreme Court held indigent persons could not be imprisoned without the right to
representative counsel. The Powell case enabled the Supreme Court's decision to be used

Pretextuality In Supreme Court Cases
Given the times in which we live, one could reasonably presume that agencies like the NSA, and legislation like 2001's Patriot Act have a monopoly on
usurping the Fourth Amendment – but, he or she would be wrong. In fact, the most urgently infringement of Americans' constitutional indemnities
against unlawful searches and seizures, is a policing practice known as "pretextuality." It is a doctrine of law enforcement that has been upheld by the
U.S. Supreme Court on multiple occasions, but none more so than in the 1996 case Whren vs. United States. It is my position that what is done by the
Supreme Court, is most effectively undone by the Supreme Court; and so I advocate that the Whren decision be definitively overturned, and its
underlying doctrine... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
United States represents the most recent step the Supreme Court has taken in placing the kind of stringent constraints upon probable cause that I am
advocating for. In a 6–3 decision, the Court declared it unconstitutional for officers to extend the time span of a traffic stop in order to allow a police
drug dog to smell the car for drugs, and search the car thereafter. The true question at hand in this case was whether or not an officer's "reasonable
suspicion" is sufficient to fulfill the requirement of probable cause, and therefore constitutionally justifies a search. As the official opinion, written by
Justice Ruth Ginsburg, states, "An officer, in other words, may conduct certain unrelated checks during an otherwise lawful traffic stop. But contrary to
Justice Alito's suggestion, ... he may not do so in a way that prolongs the stop, absent the reasonable suspicion ordinarily demanded to justify detaining
an individual" (Rodriguez vs. United States). Expounding further, Ginsburg writes, "Because addressing the infraction is the purpose of the stop, [the
stop] may last no longer than is necessary to effectuate that purpose" (Rodriguez vs. United States). Now, that's an interesting standard to set on
Ginsburg's and the Court's part. If we apply that orthodoxy to pretextual stops, then even if an officer pulls someone over for traffic offense X, the
stop itself (absent any other avenue of immediately apparent probable cause) can only last as long

Case Study: The Supreme Court Decision
The Supreme Court, located in Brisbane, was the original court which heard this matter. This was due to that it was a civil matter that dealt with an
inheritance over $750,000. This $750,000 was made up of the deceased estate as well as passbook and shares.
[1 mark]
(a)The issue of costs was dealt with by the Queensland Court of Appeal in a later hearing. Provide the citation for this later judgment and explain who
ended up bearing the cost of the appeal. Explain why the Court made the costs order that it did.
CHECK THAT IT SOUNDS DIF FROM ORGINAL
Lindsay V McGrath [2015] QCA 249 is the later judgment, which deals with the costs of the appeal. This later hearing determines whether the
appellant should incur all the respondent's fees of the appeal, or that they would or that they be covered by the deceased estate.
The court decided that there is no reasonable means of why the estate should incur the costs of a failed appeal. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
This is essential due to that it views how other cases interpreted and adjudicate the law, therefore allowing like cases to be treated alike.The particular
court this case was heard in is Supreme Court, located in Brisbane City and can be found at 415 George Street, near Roma Street Station. The
parliament or also referred to as the the Legislature also contributed in this case, with the case largely surrounding, The Succession Act 1981, was
created by The Queensland Parliament. The Queensland Parliament in this instance, had a direct impact to this case as it appointed a laws, which the
courts will interpreted. The current parliament house for Queensland is situated, at the start of George street, near the Botanic Gardens. This is very
close to the Old Parliament house which is located within the Queensland University of

These clips have even gone as far as to include a briefing before the court session, the day before a verdict is made disclosed and twenty–four hours
before what are considered important hearings (MacFarlane, 2009, p. 17). While the Supreme Court must remain transparent there is a line where they
must often respect those being put on trial as not to allow the media into the courtroom itself. In this case, there would be too many of their resources
being funnelled into maintaining the privacy of those involved (MacFarlane, 2009, p. 14). Within reason, the documents that the Court decides to make
unavailable to the public are withheld due to individual privacy in mind and are made available and therefore limiting the public's right of availability
of information with the Charter rights they serve to protect, privacy. The judges must feel that they have reached the decision without the fear of
pressure coming from outside of the court room hence a allowing their ow... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This new approach where every movement the Court makes is accounted for is seen in their backlog where the justices must have written proof of
many processes that were once done orally. They must fill out a written application to ask for leave from the Court, as of 1988, which served to
replace the not as transparent technique of an oral process before three justices (McFarlane, 2009, p. 8). This paper trail was met with a pile up of
demands of offers that must be looked over that was soon fixed in the McLachlin era through the rewriting of the Court's rules from 2000 to 2002 and
now serves as an more effective means of administration and the transparency process (MacFarlane, 2009, p.

Supreme Court Case
Supreme Court Case
Happy Villa
May 19, 2014
Loanan Ase
In the case of Robert Tolan and Marian Tolan vs. Jeffrey Wayne Cotton, I will be discussing what interest me about this case. I will also deliberating
on the liability and criminal liability of this case. The Tolan vs. Cotton case interests me because theUnited States have so many police that are
brutalizing citizens. In some cases the police officers are getting away with it. After reading, reviewing, and studying this case I have learn a lot about
the criminal system and laws that men and women should obey. I will explain how the nine judges on the Supreme courts all came to a verdict against
the police officer Jeffrey Cotton after he shot an innocent suspect. This people ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Accomplice Liability and Criminal Liability Accomplice liability consents the court to find a person or persons criminally liable for actions
committed by another person. Criminal liability is when a person is commits the crime or act and that he or she intent to commit the crime at that
moment. Sergeant Cotton was acquitted of all criminal charges against him in the criminal side. However, the Robert and Marian Tolan felt that the
lower court's decision was not fair. I do agree with the Tolans. I believe that courts did not take the evidence that was present to them inconsideration
that Cotton was guilty. Cotton carelessly made an error on typing in the car tag number that Robert Tolan and his cousin was driving. Since, he made
that mistake he is responsible criminal and civil. He should have been since to prison time and he should be responsible of the wellbeing of Robert
Tolan. On the other hand Cotton was found not criminal liability for the charges in criminal court but Tolan took his case to the Supreme Court. Cotton
then was found responsible in civil court.
Difference between the various elements of crime including actus reus, mens rea, and concurrence Mens rea, actus reus, and concurrence are all
elements to a crime. These elements must be present to charge a person with a crime. The guilty mind is known as the mens rea being that a person has
the intent to commit the crime with the mental capacity. The "actus reus" of an

Classifications In Supreme Court Cases
When the Supreme Court is making decisions in cases involving discrimination, there are three classifications and tests that are used to dictate whether
such classification of a person is, in fact, Constitutional. These three classifications and tests help in cases involving race, ethnicity, and religion,
gender, and economic status and age. They include the Suspect Classification and the Strict Scrutiny Test, the Quasi–Suspect Classifications and the
Heightened Scrutiny Test, and the Rational Basis Test. To begin with, the suspect classification works alongside the strict scrutiny test. The suspect
classification falls into play when a law is possibly considered unconstitutional because it categorizes a person based upon their race, ethnicity,

The United States Supreme Court case Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (2011), full case name: Edmund Brown; Governor of the State
of California and Kamala Harris; Attorney General of the State of California v. Entertainment Merchants Association and Entertainment Software
Association, was a landmark Supreme Court case dealing with the constitutionality and technicality of California's Assembly Bill 1179 (2005).
California Assembly Bill 1179, approved by state legislature and signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005, sought to regulate and
prohibit the sale or rental of violent videos games to minors as well as requiring labeling in advance of the existing Entertainment Software Rating
Board (ESRB) rating system ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is interesting to keep in mind that before Schwarzenegger became governor he was an actor in generally violent movies, which made top box offices
and did not receive any government intervention, what a hypocrite, but can't that be said about most politicians anyway? The next level of the Federal
court process is the United States Court of Appeals which has appellate jurisdiction, meaning they can only hear appeal cases, review the decisions of
the lower courts and check for errors. Appellate courts do not offer a new trial but deal with constitutionality or technicality of the case at hand. For
most the US Court of Appeals is their final option since the US Supreme Court on average takes seventy–five cases out of the ten–thousand they
receive per term. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower courts decision declaring that "invalid content based restriction on speech is
subject to strict scrutiny and not variable obscenity" (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0716620P.pdf). Strict scrutiny is the idea that laws
must be narrowly tailored to promote a compelling government interest. Since California had not validated a compelling interest, it infringed upon
rights granted by the First Amendment. The US Appellate court also declared that the labeling requirement violates the First Amendment as
unconstitutionally compelled speech since the law could not "clearly nor legally provide a way to determine if a video game is violent, as a result the
labeling does not convey factual information"

Supreme Court Case Brief
QADEER, MAHUM, Opinion of the Court SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Utah v Strieff Argued: February 22, 2016––– Decided:
TBD In Utah a Detective by the name of Douglas Fackrell received a tip of the whereabouts of drug activity taking place. Fackrell over a course of
some days watched the house, where he concluded that there was in fact suspicious drug activity taking place. The man who exited the house went by
the name of Strieff, who the detective decided to stop and question. By taking Streiff's I.D., Fackrell discovered a traffic warrant meant for Strieff.
Under this warrant, the detective then arrested Strieff, and then conducted a search on Strieff due to the arrest. Due to this search, Fackrell found meth
and a drug pipe inside... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
United States (1963) the Supreme Court found that the "evidence obtained following unlawful police conduct may still be admissible," unless the
evidence was not come about in a way of poor conduct. However, this was found excusable if the evidence acquired post the rest was irrelevant to the
police conduct. In this case, Wong Sun wrote an unsigned confession, which was established to not be the "fruit of the arrest." Therefore, the
confession then was eligible to be used in trial. Toy, another man under the suspicion of narcotics, was arrested under an unlawful warrant. The man
was searched by an unlawful warrant, this action becomes the "fruit of the arrest." Hence, this was not permitted to be used in court as incriminating
evidence. Similarly, in Utah v. Strieff, Strieff was arrested for a traffic warrant, which was found through an unlawful stop. Subsequently, this issued the
search of Strieff's person. The precedent case demonstrates that the original arrest was for the traffic warrant, this causes the warrant to be the "fruit of
the arrest." The search proceeding the arrest, found evidence that is not the "fruit of the arrest," and the exclusionary rule would be exempted. Strieff
argued that the unlawful stop was flagrant conduct, due to the Detective not having reasonable suspicion. However, due to the fact that this was a
high–crime neighborhood, nearly seventy–five percent of those who resided in the area, had an outstanding warrant. With the knowledge of this fact,
Fackrell had a motive to make unlawful stops. Were most likely there would be evidence to support his reason for the stop. Which leads to whether or
not the exclusionary rule would even

SUVs and limousines arrived at the federal courthouse to a sea of reporters. Each family was escorted to the building with the help of Federal
Marshals. The courtroom was blocked off for the general public and reporters. There was an outcry for information and their request for cameras
was denied. Because both families had threatened a federal judge was cited, the media didn't have a leg to stand on. However, to settle matters before
they got out of hand, senators or their representatives were allowed to sit in the proceedings. Only one senator showed up. Things got started quickly
once the judge sat down and struck his gavel three times. "The following names of attorneys are disbarred as reported to each state's board through the
Supreme Court. Each of you is charged with threatening a federal judge and directing the actions of the... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"The divorce has yet to be finalized due to the pending decision of breach of the matrimonial agreement and each criminal allegation. As the attorney
for Mrs. Lora Hansen–Durham, we have also just sent in a violation of trust. Mr. Sabastian Durham has committed adultery." "What!" Sabastian
choked. "Your father had clearly lied about that woman you were sowing your wild oats with. He insured me that your relationship was never
serious and was totally over. If that was true, then how is it possible for you and her to have a child?" "I think you should speak less and grant this
divorce. I don't want people to think I was fooled into marrying a mad woman." "I was mad to trust you and your father. Both of you knew even if
we were to have a child, they would never be the sole heir of the Durham Family. I'm only surprise that you and that woman didn't have more children
to embarrass me more then you already have. Oh, that's right. You wanted to be doubly sure we would never have the chance to have a child by
giving yourself a

The Legal Cases Of The Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is the courtroom where all the legal cases dealing with congress or the constitution go to get a final decision. The Court is
currently composed of a chief justice, eight associate justices, and nine officers. Their main goal as members of the Supreme Court is to make sure
everything and anything abides by the constitution. It has many powers when it comes to law and especially the constitution, but it is not overly
powerful due to the other two branches of the government. Checks and balances helps keep their powers level and just as important as the executive
and legislative branch powers. The Court has the ability to remove a law or refute anything that violates the United States Constitution. The Supreme
Court, on average, receives around 7,000–8,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari every term. The Court grants and hears oral arguments for eighty
cases. One case specifically was Printz v. United States. This case focused on dealing with background checks when purchasing a firearm. Jay Printz
deemed the provisions to the Brady Bill unconstitutional, decided to take it to the District Courts and eventually the case ended up in the Supreme
Court, where Stephen P. Halbrook fought and won the case based on a five to four ruling in favor of Printz. Before the Jay Printz case on the
constitutionality of the provisions of the Brady Bill went to the Supreme Court, the case went to the District Courts and the Court of Appeals. The case
won in the District

The United States Constitution creates the judicial branch of the government that led to establishing the Supreme Court. American legal system has a
significant part in shaping, preserving freedom and equality (ushistory.org p, 9a). According to the United States Court, the Judiciary Act of 1789
was used for the first time, it started with six justices (2015). Currently, the Supreme Court has eight federal associate justices and one chief justice,
all serves for life. Congress creates the Federal Court and has the power to reorganize the court system. The court has the authority to protect the
freedom of speech unjust or to express an opinion. Supreme Court makes the last decision about all cases that deals with the federal laws and treaties.
As part of the judicial branch of the government the Supreme Court, reviews and explains laws, resolves dispute and decides if a law goes against the
United States Constitution. These cases are under the "appellate jurisdiction." The judiciary chooses which case to hear, justices never ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Court case reaches the Supreme Court in 2 ways the Appeal and "Appellate" Jurisdiction. Appeals cases are 95% coming into the Supreme Court. For
justices to consider the case, they check for quality of the case with a constitutional question from the hearing. Also, a summary of the disagreement
between states and federal courts. Some cases can directly arrive at the tribunal, and it is not common.
The process of the court system is the chief justice is in–charge of the meeting, sets goals by seats by seniority. The system of a vote is by hand to
consider cases and petition; the vote has to be even. There are deals, debates, and compromising.
Hearing are set up as oral disagreement for the lawyers to argue their case. Justices also have time to ask questions about the case. Half an hour is
allowed to argue the case; colors indicate timing. White 5 minutes left and red, time

Texas Supreme Court Case Study
Texas is unusual in its judiciary systems because there are two supreme courts; one handles criminal cases, while the other handles civil cases
(Liberal Arts Instructional Technology Services, 2016). These courts are known as the Court of Criminal Appeals, and The Supreme Court of Texas;
the first handling appeals from criminal cases throughout the state, and the latter having final jurisdiction in all civil cases and cases involving
juveniles (Liberal Arts Instructional Technology Services, 2016). The only other state with a similar judiciary system is Oklahoma (Robison, 2008).
The separate Supreme Courts were established over 100 years ago to lessen caseloads and the burden on the Supreme Court, and theoretically speed up
the court process ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
While they still have too many cases and get backed up, I think it would be much worse if it were one court having to hear all the cases, or the
court would refuse to hear as many criminal appeals due to time constraints. If it assists the process even a little bit, then the separate courts meet
their goal and can ultimately be considered a success. If I were to change anything, I would probably try to make a couple more branches of both
courts in order to lessen the number of cases seen, even if it's only a little. More criminal cases could be reviewed that way, and more civil cases
could be heard in a timely fashion. I think if there was one court that would see more controversial cases, two criminal appeals courts, and two civil
cases courts, the workload could be lowered. Anything that allows more cases to be heard is important to our legal

I chose this topic for this week's forum: Supreme court of the United States Randy White, Warden v. Roger L. Wheeler on petition for Writ off
Certiorari to the United States Court of appeals for the sixth circuit, , No. 14–1372. Decided December 14, 2015
The Kentucky trial court and the Kentucky Supreme Court imposed by the trial court and sentenced to death is the sixth positive Circuit Court of
Appeals, habeas corpus review, have been overturned. Asked by the prosecutor about his ability to consider all available penalties when, "I've faced
that situation in a real sense should determine the type of decision." 638 He noted the juries make that kind of determination." Briefly, on October
1997, police in Louisville, Kentucky, found Nigel Malone in the body and Nairobi Warfield in their apartment. Malone was stabbed nine times.
Warfield was strangled to death in the DNA taken from the crime scene. It matched blood of the respondents. The applicant was charged with murders.
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The defense opposed this move and, despite the murder of two men and a few reservations about receiving a sentence of death, 638 is the response of
the jury argued that show their ability to consider the entire options penalty. Both confirmed the murder and sentenced to death. The Kentucky trial
court with the Kentucky Supreme Court have conviction and sentence. State objected to the decision of the court ", or clearly including the
unreasonable application of established federal law decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1996 ( Depending on terrorism and effective
death penalty law AEDPA), habeas relief is granted. "The Court of Appeals was necessary to analyze the applicant's state court to enforce standards
Honor Judges ruled out

"Under the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction, the Court hears cases appealed from federal courts of appeals, or it may hear appeals from
federal district courts in certain circumstances in which an act of Congress has been held unconstitutional" (Bohm & Haley, pp. 278, 2011). The
appellate powers also extend to cases from states higher courts as long as the appeals are limited to violations of federal law or constitutional rights.
In fact, the Supreme Court is primarily an appellate court, however, "the Supreme Court also has original jurisdiction... to two types of cases: (1)
cases involving representatives of foreign governments; and (2) certain cases in which a state is a party" (Bohm & Haley, pp. 279, 2011). While the
topic of judicial... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
First, strict constructionists believe "that the Constitution should be implemented as written, and if any changes are to take place in rights,
responsibilities, or liberties, the changes should take place through the political system (Congress)" (Pollock, pp. 320, 2017). Conversely,
Interpretationists view the Constitution is as an ever–evolving document that encompasses issues that should have been addressed during its creation.
As such, the differences in how the Constitution is viewed result in conflicting views that directly correlate to various understandings of the law.
The Third District Court of Appeals made note, "that it is well settled that judge can form "mental impressions" but it is prohibited from
prejudging the case, i.e. "making up their mind"" (Pankauski & Hauser, 2015). Moreover, to prejudge was defined as deciding before having heard
all of the evidence. The Supreme Court is indeed biased, as it is unavoidable because all human beings are fallible. However, it cannot be considered
prejudgment solely because their path of reasoning is understood beforehand. As long as all aspects of the case are considered before a decision is
reached the case is not

Procedural History. Alabama redrew its districts in 2012, and the Alabama Legislative Black Caucus as well as the Alabama Democratic Conference
challenged the map. The cases were consolidated and brought before a three judge federal district panel for trial. The District Court ruled in favor of
the State with four critical determinations listed below. The case was appealed directly to the Supreme Court. Facts.. Alabama redrew its districts in
2012 following the 2010 census, and had two very important goals besides traditional redistricting principles. First, it sought to minimize the deviation
from equal population to 1%, and second, avoiding retrogression under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act by keeping similar percentages of blacks in...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The decision of the District Court was vacated and remanded. Analysis. In his analysis of the first issue, Justice Breyer began by noting that the Court
has always viewed racial gerrymandering as district by district claim. The harm of being selected on the basis of race is personal which justifies the
district by district analysis. Furthermore, the plaintiffs did not waive any right to scrutiny of individual districts. While they did present evidence that
looked at statewide motivations, these only serve to strengthen their claim for each district, not altering the lawsuit to only be one on the statewide
level. The District Court cannot look at the state as an undifferentiated whole. On the second issue, the Court found that there was enough evidence to
establish standing. Testimony by officials that they had members in many counties and districts supported a reasonable inference that they would have
plaintiffs or members harmed. If the District Court wanted more evidence, it should not have improperly decided that they lacked standing. Instead, it
should have requested more evidence or permit the plaintiffs to file member lists if needed and give them an opportunity to demonstrate standing. As to
the issue of predomination, Alabama argued that equal population was the overriding factor in all their decisions. If that was the main cause for what
they did, then there is no possibility that race predominated. The Court corrected

Examples Of Supreme Court Cases
Disclosures, Lies and Liabilities: A Case to Tell the Truth
Integrity is one thing that must remain unscathed throughout the career of a law enforcement officer. It means being morally upright and having the
quality of being honest (integrity, 2016). Trustworthiness, virtue, righteousness, honor, and honesty describe what it is to be a law enforcement
officer. These are the attributes communities expect of the men and women who take an oath to protect them. Three United States Supreme Court
cases deal with lying and the liability it presents for law enforcement agencies. These cases are Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), Giglio v.
United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). The decisions in these... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
All three cases presented here deal with the disclosure of evidence by the prosecution. A court trial is the pursuit of truth that results in a verdict of
guilt or innocence depending on the evidence the prosecution and defense present to the Court. When the prosecution fails to disclose evidence that is
exculpatory, then where is the whole truth? Revealing all evidence is necessary to see the whole picture of what really happened. In Brady v.
Maryland, the prosecution purposely omitted evidence. In Giglio v. United States, the prosecution failed to disclose an arrangement where there were
concerns about the reliability of the witness. In United States v. Agurs, the prosecution again failed to disclose exculpatory evidence. The Court held
that all three cases resulted in the violation of the Due Process Clause from the failure of such disclosures. Law enforcement officers are part of the
prosecutorial process. They submit the evidence they gather to the prosecuting attorneys for presentation at a trial. If a law enforcement officer fails to
submit all evidence, destroys evidence, or lies about evidence, then he or she is lying about the case they investigate. Defense attorneys will question
the credibility and intent of the officer and prosecution if the intentionally exclude evidence or lie about the evidence that gathered. If any court finds
an officer untruthful in the presentation of evidence, then their credibility and integrity is lost. Cases following

U7A1 Supreme Court Cases
U7A1 Supreme Court Cases Supreme Court Case #1: Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969) Background: 1965 three students
from Des Moines, Iowa (15 year old John Tinker; his sister, 13 year Mary Beth Tinker; and a friend, 16 year old Christopher Eckhardt), opposing
the Vietnam War came up with a plan to wear black arm bands to their respective schools. The arm bands were to serve the purposes of symbolizing
a protest against the Vietnam War. School officials got wind of the children's protest plans and created a policy that if student showed up at school
wearing black bands would be suspended and unable to return to school until they agreed to follow the "no black arm band" policy. All three children
still chose to wear the black arm bands to school and all three were suspended from school. Issue(s): First Amendment (Freedom of Speech), Fourteenth
Amendment (Due Process) Court Decision(s): The Court ruled in favor of the students. In accordance with the First Amendment, their actions were
constitutional. It was not disruptive, nor did it invade other's rights. However, this did not give unlimited freedom of speech to the students. As long as
they continued the "peaceful" protesting without causing distractions, they could continue. Chief Justice: WARREN Legal Impact of the Decision: The
new "no black arm bands" policy at the schools did not prohibit all political symbols, but rather just singled out the black arm bands used to support no
involvement in

Essay on Supreme Court Cases
Supreme Court Cases
Engle vs. Vitale
Case: In the late 1950's the New York State Board of Regents wrote and adopted a prayer, which was supposed to be nondenominational. The board
recommended that students in public schools say the prayer on a voluntary basis every morning. In New Hyde Park Long Island a parent sued the
school claiming that the prayer violated the first amendment of the constitution. The school argued that the prayer was nondenominational and did not
attempt to "establish or endorse" a religion and thus that it did not violate the establishment clause.
Constitutional issue it relates to: Freedom of Religion
Decision: The court ruled against the school district and upheld the establishment clause of the first ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In reversing the District Court's entry of judgment for petitioners, the Court of Appeals held that the Act applied to forbid discrimination against
respondents' proposed club on the basis of its religious content, and that the Act did not violate the Establishment Clause.
Constitutional issue it relates to: Freedom of Religion
Decision: In 1985, the principal and superintendent of Westside High School (a secondary school in Omaha, Nebraska) cited the Establishment
Clause as a reason for denying the request of Bridget Mergens to form a Christian club that would have the same privileges and meet on the same
terms and conditions as other Westside student groups, except that it would have no faculty sponsor. Ms. Mergens took the case to court, and won at
first. She lost on appeal at the 8th Circuit Court, and then later won in a 8–1 decision from the Supreme Court
Johnson vs. U.S.
Case: During the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, respondent Johnson participated in a political demonstration to protest the
policies of the Reagan administration and some Dallas–based corporations. After a march through the city streets, Johnson burned an American flag
while

On June 26, 2015 the United States Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges was decided. The Court held in a 5–4 decision that the "fundamental
right to marry is guaranteed to same–sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution." In making this decision, the Court overturned its decision in Baker v. Nelson which had been invoked as precedent (28).
The fight to legalize same–sex marriage has been a long, dramatic fight that has taken place over the past several decades. It is believed to have
emerged during the 1960's counterculture movement. Since then Americans have used the right to petition (216) and the right to assemble (216) as
well as more serious methods to push for equality for persons identifying as homosexuals. In 1972, in the case of Richard John Baker v. Gerald ... Show
Hodges Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the majority opinion. He was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor,
and Elena Kagan. The majority held the stance stating that "state same–sex marriage bans are a violation of both the Fourteenth Amendment's Due
Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause." The Court listed four reasons why the fundamental right to marry applies to same–sex couples. The first
reason was "the right to personal choice regarding marriage is inherent in the concept of individual autonomy." The second reason stated that "the right
to marry is fundamental because it supports a two–person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals." The third reason
states that the basic right (pg. 29.) to marry "safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing, procreation,
and education." The fourth and last reason stated that "marriage is a keystone of our social order," and that "there is no difference between same–sex
and opposite–sex couples with respect to this

Segeration In Supreme Court Cases
Segeration was a big thing and was very controversial throughout the United States.They were many court cases and debates about the
segreation.Segeration was when the blacks and white were seperated and were based of their color which limited most of the tings that they could
do.But in the Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 the United States Supreme Court ruled that the whites and blacks could be sepreated but equal if it didnt
violate the Constuition.This was the start to ending segreation in United States.This lead up to the Brown vs Board supreme court case on segraton in
schools.
Another thing that did to help end segeration is they started boycotting on public buses.On the bus whites sat in the front and black sat in the back so
they could

Reflection On Supreme Court Cases
Supreme Court Cases there are many in the world and most of them are boring and some are interesting and some are very interesting. This one I
think is very interesting it caught my eyes and I got into it really good. I am here to explain Vernonia School District v. Acton. Then what
constitutional amendment it challenges, and some quotes from the case from James Acton. Finally I will share the result of the case and how it
ended, then my opinion of the court case and what i think and how I think the ruling should have went down. So before I get into it, I will giver
you a summary of the case so you can understand what I am saying before I start mumbling on about the court case and what I think about it and
how I think it should have turned out. In 1991 at Vernonia's Washington Grade School, a boy named James Acton was starting seventh grade and
like most kids, he wanted to do sports and have fun with other kids and get active. So that's what James did, he went home and asked his parents for
permission to play football and have fun, his parents liked the thought of him getting into sports and having fun with a team and learning about
teamwork and in general meeting new people and having more friends. So they took James to the doctors to get his physical, so that they knew he
was capable of playing. When then suddenly the doctor wanted to take a drug test and then that's when it starts but I'm not going to spoil it all right
now. As I said I will first explain the court

The United States Supreme Court Cases

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Lisa Collier

More from Lisa Collier (14)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The United States Supreme Court Cases