Marbury v Madison 1803 • was the first instance in which a law passed by Congress was declared unconstitutional. The decision greatly expanded the power of the Court by establishing its right to overturn acts of Congress, a power not explicitly granted by the Constitution. Initially the case involved Secretary of State James Madison , who refused to seat four judicial appointees although they had been confirmed by the Senate

McCulloch v Md. 1819 • upheld the right of Congress to create a Bank of the United States, ruling that it was a power implied but not enumerated by the Constitution. The case is significant because it advanced the doctrine of implied powers, or a loose construction of the Constitution. The Court, Chief Justice John Marshall reflecting “the letter and spirit” of the Constitution. wrote, would sanction laws

Gibbon v Ogden 1824 • defined broadly Congress's right to regulate commerce. The Court held that the New York law was unconstitutional, since the power to regulate interstate commerce, which extended to the regulation of navigation, belonged exclusively to Congress. In the 20th century, Chief Justice John Marshall's broad definition of commerce was used to uphold civil rights

Barron v Baltimore 1833 • Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government not to the states.

• Eminent domain case

Dred Scott v Sanford 1857 The case involved Dred Scott, a slave, who was taken from a slave state to a free territory. Scott filed a lawsuit claiming that because he had lived on free soil he was entitled to his freedom. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney disagreed, ruling that blacks were not citizens and therefore could not sue in federal court. Taney further inflamed antislavery forces by declaring that Congress had no right to ban slavery from U.S. territories

Plessy v Ferguson 1896 • was the infamous case that asserted that “equal but separate accommodations” for blacks on railroad cars did not violate the “equal protection under the laws” clause of the 14th Amendment. By defending the constitutionality of racial segregation, the Court paved the way for the repressive Jim Crow laws of the South. The lone dissenter on the Court, Justice John Marshall Harlan , protested,

Schenck v US 1919 • Certain words can be considered clear and present danger during war time and are not protected by the 1 st Amendment

Gitlow v NY 1925 • Socialist called for socialism in NY. Claimed NY violated his rights. Supremes said no it did not BUT SC did say the 1 st Amendment does apply (incorporation) does apply to states.

Everson v Bd of ed 1946 • This case said that a school district could provide school buses for religious schools. Such assistance would not violate the establishment clause.

Everson v. Board of Education

Everson v Board of Ed 1947 • This case said that a school district could provide school buses for religious schools. Such assistance would not violate the establishment clause.

Everson v. Board of Education

Brown v Bd of Education 1954 • invalidated racial segregation in schools and led to the unraveling of de jure segregation in all areas of public life. In the unanimous decision spearheaded by Chief Justice Earl Warren, the Court invalidated the Plessy ruling, declaring “in the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place” and contending that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” Future Supreme Court justice Thurgood Marshall was one of the NAACP lawyers who successfully argued the case. Rhenquist was a clerk that disagreed.

Mapp v Ohio 1961 • Evidence was seized illegally and could not be used court.

• Incorporated the exclusionary rule into the 14th Amendment and extended it to the states.

Baker v Carr 1962 • Federal Courts could hear redistricting cases for state legislatures.

• It led to Wesberry v Sanders 1962 – Ga. Cong. Districts were disproportional in size violating “one man one vote”

Shaw v Reno 1993 • White voters said boundaries of new congressional districts were minority majority. • Court agreed saying the odd shape was created to create a black district.

• Race may be one factor but not be the only factor in drawing district boundaries.

Baker v Carr 1961 • Established that federal courts do have jurisdiction in redistricting questions and that reapportionment should reflect population equality or it would be in violation of the Equal Protection Clause

Gideon v Wainright 1963 • Florida did violate person’s right to a lawyer by not providing one.

Heart of Atlanta Hotel v US 1964 • The motel's argument is that the government overstepped its bounds by using the Commerce Clause to exert influence over the hospitality industry in forcing them to treat black guests as they would white guests. The motel lost its case in district court and appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court found that the Congress did have the power exerted in the Act, and that the motel had no case against the Act.

Griswold v Connecticut 1965 • Held that various guarantees within the Bill of Rights create penumbras that establish a right to privacy in marital relations

Miranda v Arizona 1966 • The Warren Court reversed the conviction bc the suspect was not informed of his rights.

• The court would not uphold any conviction on appeal if the accused had not been informed of their constitutional rights before being questioned.

Tinker v Des Moines 1968 • The Court ruled in favor of students' rights to exercise their freedom of speech symbolically by wearing black armbands to protest the war in Vietnam.

Lemon v Kurtzman 1971 Pa law regarding funding for nonpublic school violated 3 part test of entanglements, promotion,purpose

NYT v US 1971 • The Court ruled in this case that the government could not exercise

prior restraint to prevent a newspaper

from publishing negative information about the country's involvement in Vietnam.

• Pentagon Papers Case Daniel Ellsburg gov employee leaked it. Late Nixon’s people broke into Ellsburg psychiatrist office

Roe v Wade 1973 • legalized abortion and is at the center of the current controversy between “pro-life” and “pro-choice” advocates. The Court ruled that a woman has the right to an abortionin the first trimester of pregnancy, contending that it is part of her “right to privacy.” States may intervene in the 2 nd and rd trimesters.

US v Nixon 1974 • Case which ruled that executive privilege was not unqualified

Buckley v Valeo 1976 • Upheld contribution limits in elections, but said candidates could spend their own funds without limit; also held that since financial support of a candidate is protected under freedom of speech that individuals and outside groups could spend unlimited amounts as long as they were independent of the candidate's campaign

Regents of U. of Calif v Bakke 1978 • Supremes upheld notion of affirmative action but said race could be only one factor in determining admission.

• Significant bc race could no longer be a predominant factor.

• Since 1978 rulings have been mixed. Upholding some and striking down some.

• See Grutter 2003 U of Michigan

Immigration and Naturalization Service v Chadha 1982 • Ruled that the legislative veto was unconstitutional Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha

Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992 • The Court reaffirmed a woman's right to have an abortion but upheld restrictions such as a 24-hour waiting period prior to an abortion and requiring minors to get a parent's consent before an abortion

Shaw v Reno 1993 •Black majority district violates equal protection clause of 14 th amendment.

US v Lopez 1994 • Ruled that the Fed. Gun Control Act prohibiting the possession of a gun within 1000 ft. of a school was unconst.; limited the application of the Commerce Clause

Lawrence v Texas 2003 States may not prohibit private homosexual activity between consenting adults. • Overturned opposite view of Bowers 1986