...Title/ Citation: School District of Abington Township v. Schempp; Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203, 83 S.Ct. 1650 (1965). Facts: A. The Plaintiffs are Edward Schempp and his wife. B. The Defendant is the School District of Abington Township. C. The Plaintiff’s contention is that their 14th and 1st amendment rights to the Constitution have been violated by making students participate in religious activities daily in school. D. The Defendant’s defense is that students do not have to participate in reading of the bible or the national anthem. Parental consent to be excluded must be in a hand written note and given to the school. E. The Plaintiff filed a law suit in U.S. District Court. The District Court found in favor of the Schempp Family. The School District and State Superintendent then appealed to the Supreme Court. F....
Words: 622 - Pages: 3
...was charged in Florida State Court with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a misdemeanor- a felony under Florida law. The destitute petitioner ask the court to provide counsel to represent him in court because he cannot afford a lawyer. The court denied the petitioner stating Florida law does not have to appoint counsel to defendants unless a person is charged with a capital offense. Petitioner protest that he had a right to counsel, but was force to put on his case and lost. Petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition to the Florida Supreme Court and challenge his conviction claiming the refusal to appoint counsel in his trial encroached on his 6th Amendment right of the U.S. Constitution. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petitioner relief citing case law from the Betts v. Brady case which held the...
Words: 839 - Pages: 4
...economic substantive due process came with the decision made in the 1905 Supreme Court case, Lochner v. New York. The Bakeshop Act, put into effect by the state of New York, was made to limit the number of working hours for bakers. Joseph Lochner, a bakeshop owner, violated a provision of the act that held that bakers could not work more than ten hours in one day or sixty hours in one week. When faced with the consequences for violating this provision, Lochner challenged the law by claiming it was a violation of the due process clause under the 14th Amendment. He claimed that this was a violation of his liberty of contract and that he had the right to enter into contracts of this nature with his employees. The Supreme Court...
Words: 1282 - Pages: 6
...have been many supreme court cases that involve marriages in the United States. Three for example are Griswold v. Connecticut, Loving v. Virginia, and Lawrence v. Texas. Each of these cases have differ from one another but all tie into and issue with marriages. In the case Griswold v. Connecticut, the main issue was the use of birth control by a married woman. Estelle Griswold and Lee Buxton, were arrested 1961 and convicted as “accessories” for providing information, advice and instruction to married couples on how to prevent conception in violation of a state of Connecticut statute. At the time it was illegal for a married couple to use birth control. Buxton and Griswold were the Director and Executive Director for Connecticut’s Planned Parenthood league. Their claim was that couples not being allowed to use a form of birth control was a violation of the 14th Amendment. By definition, the 14th Amendment says, the constitutional amendment that concerns equal protection under the law, and the citizenship rights of Americans. Lower courts ruled in favor of the state. Therefore, it remained illegal for a married woman to use birth control. Griswold then took the case to the supreme court. The case started in early 1965. The Court lists the implied rights protected under each amendment of the Bill of Rights. The 1st Amendment includes the right to associate, the 3rd Amendment prohibits quartering soldiers in a person’s house without their consent, the 4th Amendment protects against...
Words: 640 - Pages: 3
...In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court was dealing with the principle of a court declaring “an act of Congress void if it is inconsistent with the Constitution.” Marbury asked the Supreme Court to issue a “writ of mandamus” (an order from a court to compel a judicial/government officer to fulfill their duty to the petitioner) towards James Madison. John Marshall (chief justice) denied Marbury’s writ of mandamus. The Supreme Court did not have the authority to exercise its original jurisdiction over the case. Questions: 1. Did Marbury have the right to the commission? 2. If he did, and his right had been violated, did the law provide him with remedy? 3. Is Marbury entitled to mandamus from the Supreme Court? Decision: 4-0; Unanimously, the court ruled that Madison did not have to deliver the commission to Marbury. The court explained that Marbury had the right to receive his commission, but they were not allowed to force Madison into delivering...
Words: 666 - Pages: 3
...issues is the court addressing? What is the legal problem? 3. What law is the court applying? 4. What is the court’s decision, analysis, and rationale? For this week, you need to find a case that deals with Due Process, the Equal Protection Clause or Delegation. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) What are the important and relevant faces of the case? The Case is based upon The Equal Protection Clause, in which, this case occurred one hundred and nineteen years ago, but it was very interesting as to see what has changed during the century. In 1890, Louisiana State passed laws prohibited races to sit together on railroads; something in common with segregation in the south in the 1950’s and buses. Trains were required to have seating for different races and were divided by curtains or some form of barricade to prevent the races from sitting beside one another. Homer Adolph Plessy, a Louisiana businessman, who lived a society of whites and blacks, happen to have a black grandparent, in which Louisiana law defined him as an “octaroon”, one eight of black heritage. Plessy did not consider himself black, but Louisiana did and therefore made him sit in the segregated area for blacks. Plessy did not agree and challenged the Jim Crow laws by breaking the law intentionally and sitting in an area of the train that Louisiana law said he was prohibited to sit in, in which case caused him to be arrested and charged with criminal violation of the state law. What issues is the court addressing...
Words: 969 - Pages: 4
...The 14th amendment was proposed July 28th, 1868. The amendment gives citizenship to anyone born or naturalized in the U.S. This included former slaves even if they had just been freed after the civil war. The law was proposed because all Americans were not receiving the same rights based on religion, ethnicity, and race. Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in April of 1965. He was the one that issued the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation saying that any slaves could be free. The 14th amendment was in a way similar saying that all should be free to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The law guaranteed everyone equal rights. African Americans had a very strong opinion towards this law because they weren’t usually treated equally to all the other Americans. When the states were approving the law most of the Southern States resisted. But they had to take consideration of the 13th amendment, that protected the African Americans rights so the law passed. The first...
Words: 603 - Pages: 3
...The Plessy V. Ferguson stands as one of the most pivotal moments in American legal history and shaped the course of civil rights and segregation in the U.S. This case was decided in 1896 as it established the doctrine of separate but equal which sanction racial segregation in public facilities. While seeking relief, the states were passing legislation that coded inequalities between races. These legislations stated that there would be separate schools for separate races. This case originated in 1892 as a challenge to the Louisiana Separate Car Act which was in 1890 the law required that all railroads operating in the state provide equal but separate accommodations for white and African American passengers and prohibited passengers from entering accommodations other than...
Words: 860 - Pages: 4
...The case of Plessy v. Ferguson served as a catalyst for the implementation of “separate but equal” segregation laws that were deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court and which profoundly divided White and Colored America throughout the late 1800’s to mid 1900’s. Freshly out of the Civil War, Black America gradually sought after more forms of freedom after the bondage of slavery was destroyed. While Black males especially were granted more citizenship liberties through the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, just when they thought White America could evolve into an accepting and open-minded society, all efforts were shut down by the Jim Crow laws. That is where the Plessy v. Ferguson case starts, the Supreme Court’s endorsement...
Words: 1650 - Pages: 7
...late April 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court by a 5-4 vote affirmed the lower court judgment in Vieth and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims. On the issue of partisan gerrymandering, however, the ruling proved anything but conclusive. The significance of the ruling, it seems, now lies in its fractured set of opinions” The Justices’ split decision left the door open to reinterpreting the judiciable grounds for gerrymandering under the right circumstances. As displayed thus far, gerrymandering by Republicans has implied racial discrimination. While previous cases have...
Words: 1735 - Pages: 7
...Advocacy Groups - an association of individuals or organizations who unite to actively support or defend an idea, usually to influence policies or resource allocations through media campaigns, public presentations, publicity, and legislative lobbying efforts; GROUP WHO TRY TO RAISE AWARENESS AND INFLUENCE POLITICS AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION advocacy groups are broader. interest groups are more specific. for example an environmental group would be an advocacy group and a group to save the rainforest would be an interest group. Amicus Curiae - “Friend of the Court.” A brief filed in a lawsuit by an individual or group that is not party to the lawsuit but that has an interest in the outcome. SOMEONE, NOT BELONGING TO ANY PARTY, VOLUNTEERS TO OFFER INFORMATION TO ASSIST IN A CASE, WHICH IS WHY IT MEANS FRIEND OF THE COURT Astroturf - refers to political, advertising or public relations campaigns that are designed to mask the sponsors of the message to give the appearance of coming from a disinterested, grassroots participant (i.e. fake grassroots); FAKE GRASS/FAKE SUPPORT; OPPOSITE OF GRASSROOTS; Creating the impression of public support by paying people in the public to pretend to be supportive. Bundling - A tactic in which PACs collect contributions from like-minded individuals (each limited to $2000) and present them to a candidate or political party as a “bundle,” thus increasing the PAC’s influence. Checkbook Membership- send in money to be a member A checkbook member is...
Words: 6201 - Pages: 25
...Brown v. Board of Education: A Historic Court Case For a large part of the 1900’s, racial segregation could be seen in almost all public places. This included the public schools system. For years, black children had to go to separate schools because of the color of their skin. This began to change in 1954 with the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, which declared that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. Linda Brown and her younger sister were two black children who lived in Topeka, Kansas. Their all-black school was several miles away, and each day, they had to walk through a dangerous railroad switchyard to get to their bus stop. There was another school that was closer to their house and...
Words: 613 - Pages: 3
...BUSH v. GORE, 531 U.S. 98, 148 L.Ed.2d 388 (2000) Facts: In 2000, Al Gore, the former Vice President of the United States was facing George W. Bush for the presidential election. On December 8th of 2000, a local court in the state of Florida forced the city of Palm Beach to manually recount almost 10,000 ballots. This recount was imposed because the voters in Florida had problems with the state’s electronic voting machines. This problem was amplified because the ballots were not properly punched, a large number of ballots did not reveal who the voter intended to vote for. The reason for the manual recount was the result of malfunctioning ballot machines and the suspicion that some of the members of the ballot counting committee were not being honest in their attempts to tally the votes. After losing the state of Florida and ultimately the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore petitioned that the ballots be recounted in a formal case, filed before the Circuit Court of Florida. After this filing, he won, and a manual recount was enacted. But then, the Bush team filed for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court on the basis that the Florida court’s opinion was contrary to the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court reasoned that state of Florida violated the 14th Amendment by enacting a recounting procedure. Procedural History: Originally Gore won his case and the ballots were manually recounted; however, George W. Bush explained that the manual recount undermined the 14th Amendment to the...
Words: 409 - Pages: 2
...Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) was a very important case and turning point in our nation's history. It changed our legal system by extending the evidence exclusionary rule that was originally decided in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914). It also marked the final incorporation of the fourth amendment into the due process clause of the fourteenth. The exclusionary rule was created in Weeks which prevented the federal government from using evidence that is found during an illegal search without a warrant. Years later in Wolf v Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949) the Supreme Court ruled that both state and local governments must obey the fourth amendment by getting a warrant before conducting a search. The court also said the exclusionary rule did not apply to the states allowing state prosecutors to use illegally seized evidence in trial. Mapp v. Ohio gave the Supreme Court the chance to overrule Wolf and apply the exclusionary rule to the states. Mapp v. Ohio was quite the interesting case. It started on May 23, 1957, when three Cleveland police officers arrived at Dolly Mapp's home regarding information suggesting that a person wanted for questioning in connection with a bombing was hiding in the house, and upon a large amount of paraphernalia in the home (Mapp v. Ohio). The officers demanded entrance but Ms. Mapp refused entrance to the home without a search warrant after telephoning her attorney (Mapp v. Ohio). They took surveillance of the house and arrived some...
Words: 1696 - Pages: 7
...Case Briefs Set #1 Case: Palko v. Connecticut Cite: 302 U.S 319 (1937) Vote: 8-1 Opinion: Cordozo Facts: • Frank Palka robbed a store and killed two police officers in the process. • He then confessed to the killings after being apprehended and arrested in Buffalo, New York. • At his trial his confession was refused to be admitted by the judge and Palka was found guilty of the lesser charge, second-degree murder and received a mandatory life sentence. • State prosecutors appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors, which reversed the trial judge decision to leave out Palka’s confession. • Palka’s attorney objected stating that a new trial violated Palka’s Fifth Amendment, prohibition of double jeopardy. • Palka was eventually...
Words: 339 - Pages: 2
