41Landmark Supreme Court Cases (Based on Redesigned Test)

AP Government
46points - Each case is worth 1 point!

Directions:

1. Using Oyez research the below landmark Supreme Court cases to fill out column 3 through 6.
2. Using Wikipedia and Cornell Law, fill in column 6 (Holding: Impact or significance of the case). This is the most important part!
3. While all the below cases are important, numbers 1-15 are the most important for the AP Test.

Fill in the below chart based on presentations:

Column 1
# Required Supreme
Court Cases
Everson v. Board of
Education
1 Marbury v. Madison
2 McCulloch v. Maryland
2 3 4 5 6
Date Facts of the case Question (issue) Conclusion/Decision Holding: Impact or significance of the
decided (summary) including vote count case in clarifying the Constitution
(answer/ruling)
1947 NJ law allowed Did the NJ law violate the 5-4 said No it did not The establishment clause IS incorporated
Catholic school establishment clause (est. violate the est. clause. against the states (is applied to the
children to have their of religion) of the 1st states) however, the NJ law did not
bus fares reimbursed Amed? violate the est of religion.
by the state The 14th Amend applied
the B of R to states.
1803 The Judiciary Act 1. Do the plaintiffs have a Unanimous The Judiciary Act of 1789 was
was introduced which right to receive their decision/null and void unconstitutional in Section 13 and the
made new courts, commission? Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction
added judges, and 2. Can they sue for their was enlarged by it compared to the
gave the president commissions in court? Constitution so it conflicted with the
more control over the 3. Does the Supreme Constitution in Article 3, Section 2 and
appointment of Court have the authority was deemed null.
judges. to order the delivery of
their commissions?
1819 James W. McCulloch Did Congress have the Unanimous decision The Constitution does allow the
did not pay taxes for authority to establish the and Maryland may not Congress to have the ability to tax and
the bank that bank? impose a tax on the spend, but not establish a bank and since
Maryland had Did Maryland law bank. a bank helps the government, then
imposed taxes on unconstitutionally Maryland had no right to interfere with
because it was interfere with congressional powers by taxing the
unconstitutional. congressional powers? bank.
3 Brown v. Board of Education
4 Gideon v. Wainwright
5 Tinker v. Des Moines
6 Roe v. Wade
7 United States v. Lopez
1954 Does the segregation of
public education based
solely on race violate the
Equal Protection Clause
of the Fourteenth
Amendment?
1963 The trial court in Does the Sixth Unanimous decision The United States Constitution’s Due
Florida did not Amendment’s right to Process Clause by the Fourteenth
appoint a lawyer for counsel in criminal cases Amendment allows the right counsel and
the defendant based extend to felony the Sixth Amendment also applies to
on the Florida state defendants in state courts? this. It is applied to the states.
law.
1969 A group of students Does a prohibition against 7-2 said yes that the The public school was not permitted to
planned to wear black the wearing of armbands armbands represented punish a student wearing a black
armbands during the in public school, as a form pure speech that is armband as an anti-war protest, as
holiday season to of symbolic protest, entirely separate from applied in the First Amendment through
show support for a violate the students' the actions or conduct the Fourteenth
truce in the Vietnam freedom of speech of those participating in
War and got protections guaranteed by it.
suspended from the First Amendment?
school after the
principals created a
policy.
1973 Jane Roe challenged Does the Constitution 7-2 said that the Texas The “right to privacy” is provided by the
a Texas law that was recognize a woman’s right law violated Jone Roe’s Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
unconstitutional that to terminate her right to privacy. Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and
made abortion illegal pregnancy by abortion? that it is not always absolute. It must be
and her privacy was balanced against the government’s
abridged, protected interests and Texas law violated this
by the First, Fourth, right when making it a crime to assist a
Fifth, Ninth, and woman getting an abortion.
Fourteenth
Amendments.
1995 Alfonzo Lopez had Is the 1990 Gun-Free 5-4 said yes the The Congress cannot regulate the
state charges against School Zones Act, possession of a gun in a possession of a handgun at school
him when he carried forbidding individuals local school zone is because it doesn’t have a substantial
a concealed gun into from knowingly carrying unconstitutional. effect on interstate commerce and it is
his high school and a gun in a school zone, not an economic activity.
the charges were later unconstitutional because

8 Baker v. Carr
9 Engel v. Vitale
10 New York Times v. U.S.
11 Schenck v. United States
dropped and was it exceeds the power of
charged with Congress to legislate
violating a federal under the Commerce
criminal statute by Clause?
federal agents.
1961 A 1901 law that Did the Supreme Court 6-2 said that legislative The redistricting of state legislative
apportioned the seats have jurisdiction over apportionment was a districts was a justiciable issue and not a
for the state’s General questions of legislative justiciable issue. political question.
Assembly was apportionment?
virtually ignored and
population shifts and
economic growth
were ignored within
the state.
1962 A group of Does the reading of a 6-1 said that states The Establishment Clause of the First
organizations claimed nondenominational prayer cannot hold prayers in Amendment is being violated by
that the prayer that at the start of the school public schools even if government-directed prayers in public
the New York State day violate the it is non schools and students may remain silent
Board of Regents "establishment of denominational. or be excused from the classroom during
authorized for the religion" clause of the its recitation.
school violated the First Amendment?
Establishment Clause
of the First
Amendment.
1971 The New York Times Did the Nixon The decision was for Unless the publication would cause a
and Washington Post administration's efforts to the New York Times “grave and irreparable” danger and have
were trying to be prevent the publication of Company and they said sufficient evidence by the Government,
prevented from what it termed "classified yes that prior restraint then the exercise of prior restraint was
publishing the United information" violate the was unjustified. unjustified.
States activities in First Amendment?
Vietnam by the Nixon
Administration.
1919 Socialists Charles Did Schenck's conviction Unanimous decision During a state of war, the defendant’s
Schenck and under the Espionage Act and the clause that does criticism was intended to result in a
Elizabeth Baer were for criticizing the draft not shield advocacy crime and was not protected by the First
convicted of violating violate his First urging conduct deemed Amendment. The enlistment and
the First Amendment Amendment right to unlawful under the recruiting service of the U.S. armed
by causing freedom of speech? Espionage Act is the forces had a clear and present danger.
insubordination in the
 military and to Free Speech Clause of
obstruct recruitment, the First Amendment.
which led to being
charged of violating
the Espionage Act of
1917.
12 McDonald v. Chicago 2010 A District of Does the Second 5-4 said yes that the The Due Process Clause or Privileges or
Columbia handgun Amendment apply to the Second Amendment Immunities Clause of the fourteenth
ban violated the states because it is applies to the states. Amendment allows the Second
Second Amendment incorporated by the Amendment to be applied to the states,
that was held by the Fourteenth Amendment's so the Seventh Circuit of the United
Supreme Court and Privileges and Immunities States Court of Appeals reversed and
they said that the or Due Process clauses remanded.
federal government and thereby made
had authority over the applicable to the states?
law in question so the
Second Amendment
was applicable, and
plaintiffs said that the
states should also
have the Second
Amendment applied.
13 Shaw v. Reno 1993 There was a North Did the North Carolina 5-4 said yes that North There is a standard of strict scrutiny
Carolina residents' claim, that the Carolina created a under the equal protection clause when
congressional State created a racially racially gerrymandered redistricting based on race. The
reapportionment plan gerrymandered district, district. compliance of the Voting Rights Act
that changed its raise a valid constitutional must be ensured by the people who are
rejected plan, by the issue under the Fourteenth doing redistricting and they must be
U.S. Attorney Amendment's Equal conscious of the race.
General, with only Protection Clause?
one black-majority
district. The
reapportionment plan
was later changed to
two black-majority
districts but one of
them was an unusual
shaped district and
five North Carolina
 residents challenged
it.
14 Wisconsin v. Yoder 1972 Three parents, Jonas Did Wisconsin's Unanimous decision The Free Exercise Clause of the First
Yoder, Wallace requirement that all Amendment was violated by the
Miller, and Adin parents send their children Wisconsin Compulsory School
Yutzy, were to school at least until age Attendance law because the Amish
persecuted because of 16 violate the First parents have a right that they are able to
their religious beliefs Amendment by direct the religious upbringing of their
of sending their criminalizing the conduct children and the Wisconsin Compulsory
children to school of parents who refused to School Attendance law interfered it with
after 8th grade. send their children to their acquired attendance after eighth
school for religious grade. The Supreme Court of Wisconsin
reasons? affirmed.
15 Citizens United v FEC 2010 The film Hillary: the 1) Did the Supreme 5-4 said no, no, yes, United States District Court for the
Movie had an Court's decision in and yes. District of Columbia reversed because
injunction by the McConnell resolve all they violated the First Amendment’s
Citizens United constitutional as-applied protections of freedom of speech by the
against the Federal challenges to the BCRA Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act.
Election Commission when it upheld the
and tried to prevent disclosure requirements of
the application of the the statute as
Bipartisan Campaign constitutional?
Reform Act. 2) Do the BCRA's
disclosure requirements
impose an
unconstitutional burden
when applied to
electioneering
requirements because they
are protected "political
speech" and not subject to
regulation as "campaign
speech"?
3) If a communication
lacks a clear plea to vote
for or against a particular
candidate, is it subject to
regulation under the
BCRA?
 4) Should a feature length
documentary about a
candidate for political
office be treated like the
advertisements at issue in
McConnell and therefore
be subject to regulation
under the BCRA?

Column 1 2 3 4 5 6
# Non-required, but Date Facts of the case Question (issue) Conclusion/Decision Holding: Impact or significance of the
decided (summary) including vote count case in clarifying the Constitution
essential Supreme
Court Cases (answer/ruling)
16 Plessy v Ferguson 1896 There were separate Does the Separate Car Act 7-1 said no that the Under the Equal Protection Clause, the
railway cars for violate the Fourteenth Separate Car Act does “separate but equal” provision of private
whites and blacks and Amendment? not violate the services is constitutional and is
it was called the Fourteenth mandated by the state government.
Separate Car Act. Amendment.
Homer Plessy
participated to
challenge the Act and
was later arrested
when refusing to
vacate the
whites-only car.
Plessy’s lawyer
argued saying that the
Separate Car Act
violated the
Thirteenth and
Fourteenth
Amendments.
17 Gitlow v New York 1925 A socialist named Does the First 7-2 said no that the The Amendment that prohibits states
Gitlow was arrested Amendment prevent a First Amendment does from infringing free speech is the
for disturbing a “Left state from punishing not prevent a state from Fourteenth Amendment. Under New
Wing Manifesto” and political speech that punishing political York’s Criminal Anarchy Law, the
he argued that there directly advocates the speech that directly defendant was properly convicted
 was no resulting government’s violent advocates the because he disseminated newspapers to
action flowing from overthrow? government’s violent advocate the violent overthrow of the
the manifesto’s overthrow. government.
publication, so the
appellate division and
the New York Court
of Appeals affirmed
his conviction.
18 Mapp v Ohio 1961 After an admittedly Were the confiscated 6-3 said yes that the Ohio Supreme Court Reversed and
illegal police search materials protected from confiscated materials unconstitutionally obtained evidence is
of her home for a seizure by the Fourth are protected from excluded from use in criminal
fugitive, Dollree Amendment. seizure by the Fourth prosecution from. This is based on the
Mapp was convicted Amendment. Fourth Amendment prohibition against
of possessing obscene unreasonable searches and seizures,
materials. On the through the Fourteenth Amendment, it is
basis of freedom of also applied to states.
expression, she
appealed her
conviction.
19 Miranda v Arizona 1966 Ernesto Miranda Does the Fifth 5-4 said yes that the The Fifth Amendment requires that law
wasn’t informed Amendment’s protection Fifth Amendment’s officials advise suspects of their right to
about his Fifth against self-incrimination protection against obtain an attorney during the
Amendment rights extend to the police self-incrimination interrogations at no charge if need be,
during an interrogation of a suspect? extends to the police and while in police custody and to
interrogation and interrogation of a remain silent. The Supreme Court of
wrote a confession. suspect. Arizona reversed and remanded.
He was announced
guilty and since
Miranda did not
specifically request
counsel, the Supreme
Court of Arizona
affirmed and held that
his constitutional
rights were not
violated.
20 Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964 The Heart of Atlanta Did Congress, in passing Unanimous decision The Northern District of Georgia
Motel refused to Title II of the 1964 Civil affirmed that the powers of Congress did
accept Black Rights Act, exceed its not unconstitutionally exceed under the
 Americans and since Commerce Clause powers Commerce Clause by enacting Title II of
the motel by depriving places of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which
discriminated on the public accommodation of prohibited racial discrimintation in
basis of race under the right to choose their public accommodations.
Title II, the own customers?
government sought to
enjoin them.
21 Regents of the University of 1978 Allan Bakke was a Did the University of 8-1 said yes and no that Judgment of the Supreme Court of
California v Bakke thirty-five-year-old California violate the it did violate the equal California forbade the university from
white man who Fourteenth Amendment's protection clause of the taking race into account in admissions
applied for equal protection clause, Fourteenth Amendment and ordered admitted Bakke into the UC
admissions twice for and the Civil Rights Act and no that it also Davis Medical School.
the University of of 1964, by practicing an violated the Civil
California Medical affirmative action policy Rights act of 1964.
School at Davis and that resulted in the
was rejected both repeated rejection of
times. He had better Bakke's application for
qualifications than admission to its medical
the minorities but was school?
still rejected so he
contended in the
California and
Supreme Court that
he was excluded from
admission because of
his race.
22 Texas v Johnson 1989 An American flag Is the desecration of an 5-4 said yes that the The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
was burned by American flag, by burning desecration of an affirmed that the First Amendment is
Gregory Lee Johnson or otherwise, a form of American flag, by violated when a statute criminalizes the
in front of the Dallas speech that is protected burning or otherwise, is desecration of the American flag.
City Hall as a means under the First a form of speech that is
of protest. He was Amendment? protected under the
later convicted under First Amendment.
the Texas Law and
had a $2,000. The
case went to the
Supreme Court after
the Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals
 reversed the
conviction.
23 Buckley v Valeo 1976 Financial Did the limits placed on The Court had two The Court held expenditure limits
contributions to electoral expenditures by conclusions, the limits unconstitutional and campaign
candidates were the Federal Election placed on electoral contributions had some federal limits
restricted by the and Campaign Act of 1971, expenditures by the upheld by the Court.
there was a law that and related provisions of Federal Election
individuals could the Internal Revenue Campaign Act of 1971
only contribute a Code of 1954, violate the did not violate the First
certain amount of First Amendment's Amendment, while the
money to one freedom of speech and related provision of the
candidate. Above a association clauses? Internal Revenue Code
certain threshold of 1954 did violate the
amount, it was First Amendment.
required to report the
contributions.
24 New York Times v Sullivan 1964 The New York Times Did Alabama's libel law Unanimous decision Unless the statements were made with
published an ad and it unconstitutionally infringe actual malice, the official conduct of a
had several minor on the First Amendment's public official cannot have false
factual inaccuracies freedom of speech and defamatory statements by a newspaper,
so the city Public freedom of press so the newspaper cannot be held liable.
Safety Commissioner, protections?
L.B. Sullivan, wrote a
request for the New
York Times to retract
the information and
they refused.
25 Dred Scott v Samford 1857 In Missouri, Dread Was Dred Scott free or 7-2 said that Dred Scott There was a lack of jurisdiction so the
Scott was a slave. He slave? was a slave. suit was dismissed and the judgement
then lives in a free reversed.
state, Illinois, from
1833 to 1843 and
later filed a suit in
Missouri for his
freedom.
26 Miller v California 1973 Miller advertised the Is the sale and distribution 5-4 said that the sale The definition of “obscene material” was
sale of “adult” of obscene materials by and distribution of lessened and the Court rejected the
material in a mass mail protected under the obscene materials by “utterly without redeeming social value”
mailing campaign First Amendment's mail are not protected test of Memoirs decision.
 and was violating the freedom of speech under the First
California statute guarantee? Amendment.
which prohibits the
distribution of
obscene material.
27 Gibbons v Ogden 1824 Robert R. Livingston Does the Commerce Unanimous decision The New York law was invalid because
and Robert Fulton Clause give Congress Congress had designated powers to
had a monopoly over authority over interstate regulate interstate commerce and the
the navigation on navigation? broad definition of commerce includes
waters within state navigation because of the Commerce
jurisdiction. Aaron Clause of the Constitution.
Ogden and other
competitors were
against it and then he
later formed a
partnership with
Thomas Gibbons.
Gibbons later
operated a steamboat
belonging to Ogden
to New York and had
a suit filed against
him by Ogden.
28 Lemon v Kurtzman 1973 The Supreme Court Was it an abuse of a 5-3 said no that it was The law must have a legitimate secular
said that the court's discretion to allow an abuse of a court’s purpose, not have the primary effect of
Establishment Clause payment of allocated discretion to allow either advancing or inhibiting religion,
of the First funds to nonpublic payment of allocated and not result in an excessive
Amendment was religious schools, after funds to nonpublic entanglement of government and
violated by Act 109 such allocations were religious schools, after religion to be considered constitutional
and the district court found unconstitutional by such allocations were under the Establishment Clause of the
remanded it. After the Supreme Court? found unconstitutional First Amendment.
that, Lemon and by the Supreme Court.
others challenged the
district court.
29 US v Nixon 1974 Seven of President Is the President's right to Unanimous decision The president of the United States is not
Nixon’s closest aides safeguard certain completely above the law and
in the Watergate information, using his constitutional questions are determined
affair had indictments "executive privilege" by the Supreme Court’s final decision.
from a grand jury and confidentiality power, Executive privilege cannot be used as an
 Nixon’s appointed entirely immune from excuse by the president to withhold
special prosecutor judicial review? evidence that is “demonstrably relevant
and the defendants in a criminal trial.”
sought audio tapes of
conversations
recorded by Nixon.
30 Loving v. Virginia 1967 There were two Did Virginia's Unanimous decision The Equal Protection Clause and Due
residents in Virginia antimiscegenation law Process Clause of the Fourteenth
who got married in violate the Equal Amendment to the United States
the district of Protection Clause of the Constitution were violated by the ban on
Columbia. Since Fourteenth Amendment? interracial marriage.
they were both
different races, when
they went back to
Columbia, they were
sent to jail for a year
because they violated
the state’s
antimiscgenation
statute, which banned
inter-racial marriages.
31 Griswold v Connecticut 1965 There was a law that Does the Constitution 7-2 said yes that the Connecticut Supreme Court reversed
was passed by protect the right of marital Constitution does because the Connecticut law violated the
Connecticut that privacy against state protect the right of right to marital privacy by criminalizing
banned the use of any restrictions on a couple's marital privacy against the use of contraceptives.
drug, medical device, ability to be counseled in state restrictions on a
or other instrument in the use of contraceptives? couple’s ability to be
furthering counseled in the use of
contraception. C. Lee contraceptives.
Buxton and Estelle
Griswold opened up a
birth control clinic
and were arrested for
violating the law.
32 Shelley v Kraemer 1948 There was a racially Does the enforcement of a Unanimous decision If a state enforces restrictive covenants
restrictive covenant racially restrictive that prohibits a person from owning or
that was enacted in a covenant violate the Equal occupying property based on race or
St. Louis, Missouri Protection Clause of the color, then it violates the Fourteenth
neighborhood in Fourteenth Amendment? Amendment.
 1911. The covenant
prevented
African-Americans
and Asian-Americans
from moving into the
neighborhood and a
family of
African-Americans
moved into the
neighborhood so
Louis Kraemer
brought suit to
enforce the covenant.
33 New Jersey v T.L.O. 1985 A high school student Does the exclusionary 6-3 said yes that Searches conducted by public school
named T.L.O was rule apply to searches exclusionary rule does officials (administrators) are partially
found with marijuana conducted by school apply to searches applied by the prohibition of
by a search and she officials in public conducted by school unreasonable searches and seizures of
tried to move to schools? officials in public the Fourth Amendment, therefor, the
suppress evidence. schools, but the search search of the student’s purse was
She was found guilty in this case was reasonable.
with a one year reasonable.
probation. Since the
exclusionary rule of
the Fourth
Amendment applies
to searches and
seizures conducted by
school officials in
public schools, the
New Jersey Supreme
Court reversed.
34 Reno v ACLU 1997 The 1996 Did certain provisions of Unanimous decision Media is given full protection because
Communications the 1996 Communications the internet is entitled to do so like the
Decency Act was Decency Act violate the print press. Government regulations of
challenged by several First and Fifth broadcast media that are justified by
litigants because it Amendments by being special factors do not apply.
criminalized overly broad and vague in
intentional their definitions of the
transmissions that are types of internet
 supposed to protect communications which
minors from they criminalized?
unsuitable internet
material.
35 Reynolds v US 1879 George Reynolds Is religious duty or belief Unanimous decision Supreme Court of Utah affirmed that
married another a defense to a criminal The Free Exercise Clause of the First
woman while still charge? Amendment does not protect the right to
married to his engage in any religious activity
previous wife and whatsoever, but does protect the right to
was charged with hold any religious belief.
bigamy under the
federal Morrill
Anti-Bigamy Act.
He said that he had to
marry multiple
women because of his
religion and that his
First Amendment was
violated.
36 Obergefell v. Hodges 2015 Relevant state (1) Does the Fourteenth 5-4 said yes that the United States Court of Appeals for the
agencies in Ohio, Amendment require a Fourteenth Amendment Sixth Circuit reversed and Baker v.
Michigan, Kentucky, state to license a marriage does require a state to Nelson overturned because a state is
and Tennessee were between two people of the license a marriage required to recognize a marriage
sued by groups of same sex? between two people of between two people of the same sex
same-sex couples and the same sex and yes when their marriage was lawfully
they said that the (2) Does the Fourteenth that the Fourteenth licensed and performed out-of-state, and
Equal Protection Amendment require a Amendment does license a marriage between two people
Clause and due state to recognize a require a state to of the same sex.
Process Clause of the marriage between two recognize a marriage
Fourteenth people of the same sex between two people of
Amendment were that was legally licensed the same sex that was
violated by the states’ and performed in another legally licensed and
laws. state? performed in another
state.
37 Employment Division, 1990 Two counselors were Can a state deny 6-2 said yes that the The states are permitted to prohibit
Department of Human fired by the unemployment benefits to state can deny sacramental peyote use and to deny
Resources of Oregon v rehabilitation a worker fired for using unemployment benefits unemployment benefits to persons
Smith organization for a illegal drugs for religious to a worker fired for discharged for such use because of the
private drug purposes? Free Exercise Clause. The Free Exercise
 rehabilitation using illegal drugs for Clause of the First Amendment was not
organization ingested religious purposes. violated because of the general
peyote for their applicability of neutral laws.
religious ceremonies.
They wanted
unemployment
compensation and
were denied so the
state appellate court
reversed it and said
that the denial
violated their First
Amendment of the
right to the free
exercise of religion.
38 Santa Fe Independent School 1990 Under the Does the Santa Fe 6-3 said yes that the The Establishment Clause is violated
District v Doe Establishment Clause Independent School Santa Fe Independent because the school district’s policy was
of the First District's policy School District’s policy allowed student-led, student-initiated
Amendment, one permitting student-led, permitting student-led, prayers at public high school football
Mormon and one student-initiated prayer at student-initiated prayer games.
Catholic family along football games violate the at football games
with others filed a Establishment Clause of violates the
suit against the the First Amendment? Establishment Clause
practice of the Santa of the First
Fe High School’s Amendment.
student council
chaplain’s prayers
before every home
varsity football game.
39 Planned Parenthood of 1992 Several aborsion Can a state require 5-4 agreed with most Under the Fourteenth Amendment, the
Southeastern Pennsylvania v clinics and physicians women who want an of the provisions but Pennsylvania law that required spousal
Casey challenged provisions abortion to obtain imposed a new awareness before obtaining an abortion
of the abortion informed consent, wait 24 standard to determine was invalid because married women
control law in 1988 hours, if married, notify the validity of laws seeking abortion had an undue burden.
and 1989 where there their husbands, and, if restricting abortions.
has to be informed minors, obtain parental
consent and a 24 hour consent, without violating
waiting period before their right to abortion as
the procedure.
 guaranteed by Roe v.
Wade?
40 Furman v Georgia 1972 Furman accidently Does the imposition and 5-4 said yes that Cruel and unusual punishments were
killed a resident of carrying out of the death imposition and constituted and there was a violation of
the house he was penalty in these cases carrying out of the the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments
burglarizing by constitute cruel and death penalty in these because of the arbitrary and inconsistent
falling and was unusual punishment in cases does constitute imposition of the death penalty.
sentenced to death violation of the Eighth cruel and unusual
with the conviction of and Fourteenth punishment in violation
murder. Amendments? of the Eighth
Amendments.
41 Gregg v Georgia 1976 Gregg was sentenced Is the imposition of the 7-2 said no that the The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments
to death for armed death sentence prohibited imposition of the death are not automatically violated by the
robbery and murder under the Eighth and sentence is not imposition of the death penalty. The
by the jury and said Fourteenth Amendments prohibited under the death sentence may be constitutional if
that his Eighth and as "cruel and unusual" Eighth and Fourteenth the jury decision is subjected to
Fourteenth punishment? Amendments as “cruel meaningful appellate review, and is
Amendments were and unusual” furnished with standards to direct and
violated because of punishment. limit the sentencing discretion. The
the imposition for the death sentence is unconstitutional when
robbery conviction it is mandatory such that there is no
because it was a provision for mercy based on the
“cruel and unusual” characteristics of the defender.
punishment.
42 Reynolds v Sims 1964 Voters from Jefferson Did Alabama's 8-1 said yes that Based on the principle “one person, one
County in Alabama apportionment scheme Alabama’s vote”, there must roughly be equal
challenged the violate the Fourteenth apportionment scheme populations by state senate districts.
apportionment of the Amendment's Equal did violate the
state legislature Protection Clause by Fourteenth
because of the lack of mandating at least one Amendment’s Equal
proportionality that representative per county Protection Clause.
prevents them from and creating as many
effectively senatorial districts as there
participating in a were senators, regardless
republican form of of population variances?
government.
43 Korematsu v. United States 1944 Executive Order 9066 Did the President and 6-3 said yes that the The internment of Japanese Americans
required Congress go beyond their President and Congress during World War 2 was a constitutional
Japanese-Americans war powers by did go beyond their executive order.
to move into implementing exclusion war powers by
relocation camps as a and restricting the rights implementing
matter of national of Americans of Japanese exclusion and
security and a descent? restricting the rights of
Japanese-American Americans of Japanese
man named Fred descent.
Korematsu refused
and was arrested. He
was convicted of
violating the
Executive Order, he
argued and said that
Executive Order 9066
violated the Fifth
Amendment.
44 Swann v 1971 There was very little Were federal courts Unanimous decision It is constitutional to promote integration
Charlotte-Mecklenburg progress in the constitutionally by busing students.
Board desegregation of authorized to oversee and
schools and a school produce remedies for
in North Carolina state-imposed
named segregation?
Charlotte-Mecklenbu
rg had a system
where approximately
14,000 black students
attended schools that
were either totally
black or more than
99% black.
45 Terry v Ohio 1968 Terry and two other Was the search and 8-1 said that the search The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed
men were frisked by seizure of Terry and the and seizure of Terry that the Fourth Amendment is not
a plain clothes other men in violation of and the other men was violated if the police is suspicious of
policeman and the the Fourth Amendment? not in violation of the someone who could be armed and
policeman found Fourth Amendment. dangerous, the police may stop a person
weapons on two of if they have a reasonable suspicion that
them. Terry was the person has committed a crime or is
 sentenced to three about to commit a crime, and they have
years in jail and the ability to frisk them.
convicted of carrying
a concealed weapon.
46 Bush v Gore 2000 The Florida Supreme Did the Florida Supreme 7-2 said that the The Florida Supreme Court reversed and
Court ordered every Court violate Article II Florida Supreme Court remanded because it was
county in Florida to Section 1 Clause 2 of the did violate Article II unconstitutional to have manual recount
recount the votes for U.S. Constitution by Section 1 Clause 2 of of votes seeking to meet the December
the presidential making new election law? the U.S. Constitution 12 “safe harbor” deadline under the
elections and Do standardless manual and they also violated Equal Protection Clause of the
Governor George recounts violate the Equal the Equal Protection Fourteenth Amendment.
Bush and his running Protection and Due and Due Process
mate, Richard Process Clauses of the Clauses of the
Cheney, sought for a Constitution? Constitution.
stay in the Florida
Supreme Court’s
decision after they
filed a request for
review in the
Supreme Court.

Who was in charge of the court at the time? List of Chief Justices
New Deal Era (1930s) Conservative court ruled New Deal laws unconstitutional
The Warren Court (1953-1969) “The most liberal court ever”
The Burger Court (1969-1986) Court became slightly more conservative
The Rehnquist Court (1986-2005) The court moved more to the right striking down federal laws, returning power to the states.
The Roberts Court (2005-Present) "Conservative in most cases, liberal in some." A split court.

1. Marbury v. Madison, 1803*

2. McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819*
3. Brown v. Board of Education, 1954*
4. Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963*
5. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 1969*
6. Roe v. Wade, 1973*
7. United States v. Lopez, 1995*
8. Baker v. Carr, 1961*
 9. Engel v. Vitale, 1962*
10. New York Times Company v. U.S., 1971*
11. Schenck v. United States, 1919*
12. McDonald v. Chicago, 2010*
13. Shaw v. Reno, 1993*
14. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 1972*
15. Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (FEC), 2010*

Non-required, but essential Supreme Court Cases

16. Plessy v Ferguson, 1896

17. Gitlow v New York, 1925
18. Mapp v Ohio, 1961
19. Miranda v Arizona, 1966
20. Heart of Atlanta Motel v US, 1964
21. Regents of the University of California v Bakke, 1978
22. Texas v Johnson, 1989
23. Buckley v Valeo, 1976
24. New York Times v Sullivan, 1964
25. Dred Scott v Samford, 1857
26. Miller v California, 1973
27. Gibbons v Ogden, 1824
28. Lemon v Kurtzman, 1973
29. US v Nixon, 1974
30. Loving v. Virginia, 1967
31. Griswold v Connecticut, 1965
32. Shelley v Kraemer, 1948
33. New Jersey v T.L.O., 1985
34. Reno v ACLU, 1997
35. Reynolds v US, 1879
 36. Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015
37. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v Smith, 1990
38. Santa Fe Independent School District v Doe, 1990
39. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey, 1992
40. Furman v Georgia, 1972
41. Gregg v Georgia, 1976
42. Reynolds v Sims, 1964
43. Korematsu v. United States, 1944
44. Swann v Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board, 1971
45. Terry v Ohio, 1968
46. Bush v Gore, 2000
Additional resource for summary of big cases.