Landmark 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 2 3 4 5 6
# Required Supreme 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
Court Cases
(answer/ruling)
Everson v. Board of 1947 NJ law allowed Did the NJ law violate the 5-4 said No it did not The establishment clause IS incorporated
Education 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.
1 Marbury v. Madison 1803 Marbury petitioned Do the plaintiffs have a Unanimous decision Marshall established Judicial Review
for a writ of right to receive their for Marbury but did not and could deem a law unconstitutional.
mandamus commissions? require Madison to
compelling the Can they sue for their deliver the commission
delivery of commissions in court?
commissions Does the Supreme Court
have the authority to order
the delivery of their
commissions?

2 McCulloch v. Maryland
1819 Congress chartered Did Congress have the 6-1 Maryland cannot Enhanced federal power and gave ways
the second bank of authority to establish the impose a tax to achieve the Constitutional
the US, James bank responsibilities.
McCulloch refused to Did the Maryland law
pay bank taxes. unconstitutionally
interfere with
congressional powers
3 Brown v. Board of Education
4 Gideon v. Wainwright
5 Tinker v. Des Moines
6 Roe v. Wade
7 United States v. Lopez
8 Baker v. Carr
1954 African American Does the segregation of Unanimous decision to The Court stripped away segregation and
students were denied public education based overturn the rules made equal opportunity the law.
applications to certain solely on race violate the
schools due to Equal Protection Clause
segregation. of the Fourteenth
Amendment
1963 Gideon was charged Does the Sixth Unanimous decision All felons now had a right to an attorney.
with felony breaking Amendment's right to for Gideon, should
and entering, and counsel in criminal cases have had a lawyer
requested a lawyer to extend to felony
represent him but was defendants in state courts
denied
1969 Students wanted to Does a prohibition against 7-2 decision for Tinker, Protected free speech because wearing
wear armands to the wearing of armbands Supreme Court ruled an armband was not a disruptive display
represent the truce of in public school, as a form that this was pure of protest.
the Vietnam war, but of symbolic protest, speech and allowed.
were denied and violate the students'
punished by their freedom of speech
school. protections guaranteed by
the First Amendment
1973 Jane Roe (alias) filed Does the Constitution 7-2 for Roe, you may Opened the door to safer and legal
against a Texas law recognize a woman's right abort during the first alternatives instead of underground
outlawing abortion to terminate her trimester of pregnancy abortion.
pregnancy by abortion
1995 Alfonso Lopez Is the 1990 Gun-Free 5-4, saying that it was First time in over 50 years that the court
brought a gun to his School Zones Act, not an economic said Congress overstepped its power.
high school forbidding individuals activity and that the
from knowingly carrying law had nothing to do
a gun in a school zone, with commerce.
unconstitutional because
it exceeds the power of
Congress to legislate
under the Commerce
Clause
1961 Baker believed that Did the Supreme Court 6-2 decision for baker, Made it possible for unrepresented
Tennessee’s have jurisdiction over legislative voters to have their districts redrawn.
reapportionment questions of legislative apportionment was a
impacted economic apportionment justiciable issue
growth
9 Engel v. Vitale 1962 The New York Board Does the reading of a 6-1 for Engel, public Held official recitation of prayers in
of Regents authorized nondenominational prayer school cannot hold public schools violated the First
a short voluntary at the start of the school prayers, even if it is not Amendment clause.
prayer at the day violate the required
beginning of each "establishment of
school day. religion" clause of the
First Amendment
10 New York Times v. U.S. 1971 The Nixon Did the Nixon Decision for New York Deemed government censorship is
Administration tried administration's efforts to Times, Per Curiam unconstitutional.
to prevent classified prevent the publication of opinion
papers regarding what it termed "classified
American activity in information" violate the
Vietnam from being First Amendment
published
11 Schenck v. United States 1919 Schenck was charged Did Schenck's conviction Unanimous decision Decided that sometimes they sacrifice
with conspiracy to under the Espionage Act for United States, free individual freedom for social order.
violate the espionage for criticizing the draft speech clause does not
act of 1917 violate his First allow for promoting
Amendment right to illegal activity
freedom of speech
12 McDonald v. Chicago 2010 Suits filed against Does the Second 5-4 for McDonald, Guaranteed the right for people to bear
Chicago for their gun Amendment apply to the stating that the 14th arms under the Second Amendment.
bans. People believed states because it is Amendment makes the
this violated their incorporated by the Second Amendment
Second Amendment Fourteenth Amendment's applicable to the states.
rights. Privileges and Immunities
or Due Process clauses
and thereby made
applicable to the states
13 Shaw v. Reno 1993 North Carolina’s Did the North Carolina 5-4 for Shaw, it was Redistricting based on race was not
reapportionment was residents' claim, that the decided that the state okay.
drawn to separate State created a racially was being
voters based on race. gerrymandered district, reapportioned to
raise a valid constitutional separate voters based
issue under the Fourteenth on race
Amendment's Equal
Protection Clause
14 Wisconsin v. Yoder 1972 Three Amish people Did Wisconsin's Unanimous decision, Court ruled that individual liberty was
decided that they requirement that all First Amendment greater than forcing kids to attend
didn’t want to send parents send their children outweighed States school.
their kids to school to school at least until age
past 8th grade 16 violate the First
because it went Amendment by
against their beliefs. criminalizing the conduct
of parents who refused to
send their children to
school for religious
reasons
15 Citizens United v FEC 2010 Did the Supreme Court's 5-4 for Citizens United, Allowed unlimited election spending by
decision in McConnell decided that the BRCA corporations and labor unions, fueling
resolve all constitutional can regulate these the rise of Super Pacs.
as-applied challenges to things but the Supreme
the BCRA when it upheld Court did not resolve
the disclosure all the challenges.
requirements of the statute
as constitutional?

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 Required separate Does the Separate Car Act 7-1 for Ferguson, said Established constitutionality in
train cars for blacks violate the Fourteenth state law was segregation until over 50 years later.
and whites Amendment unconstitutional and
violated the 13th and
14th amendment.
17 Gitlow v New York 1925 Gitlow was arrested Does the First 7-2 decision for New Expanded the reach of the First
for distributing Left Amendment prevent a York. They can Amendment protections. Court
Wing Manifesto state from punishing advocate against determined the First Amendment applied
political speech that violent efforts to to state governments as well as the
directly advocates the overthrow the federal government.
government's violent government
overthrow
18 Mapp v Ohio 1961 Mapp was convicted Were the confiscated 6-3 for Mapp. All Strengthened Fourth Amendment
of possessing obscene materials protected from evidence must be protection against unreasonable searches
materials after an seizure by the Fourth obtained legally and seizures.
admittedly illegal Amendment
police search of her
home for a fugitive.
She appealed her
conviction on the
basis of freedom of
expression
19 Miranda v Arizona 1966 Consolidation of 4 Does the Fifth 5-4 for Miranda. Law Ruled that a defendant’s statements are
cases. Miranda was Amendment’s protection enforcement must inadmissible unless defendant has been
arrested for against self-incrimination remind criminals of informed of their right to have an
kidnapping and rape. extend to the police their right to remain attorney.
Held that his rights interrogation of a suspect silent and to get an
were not violated attorney for the person
being interrogated.
20 Heart of Atlanta Motel v US 1964 The motel refused to Did Congress, in passing Unanimous decision Government could enjoin private
accept black Title II of the 1964 Civil for the United States. businesses from discriminating under the
Americans and the Rights Act, exceed its Commerce Clause basis of race.
US sought to end that Commerce Clause powers extends to
by depriving places of anti-discrimination.
public accommodation of
the right to choose their
own customers
21 Regents of the University of 1978 Bakke, a 35 year old Did the University of 8-1 decision for Bakke. Ruled unconstitutional for University’s
California v Bakke white man applied to California violate the Four judges said that racial standards for admission, but that
college and was Fourteenth Amendment's any system involving affirmative action is acceptable under
rejected twice equal protection clause, race will not work. certain circumstances.
because he wasn’t a and the Civil Rights Act
minority, even though of 1964, by practicing an
he tested higher than affirmative action policy
every minority that resulted in the
applicant. repeated rejection of
Bakke's application for
admission to its medical
school
22 Texas v Johnson 1989 Johnson burned an Is the desecration of an 5-4 for Johnson, it was The Supreme Court lowered First
American Flag in American flag, by burning deemed as expressive Amendment rights because of a Texas
 front of a city hall as or otherwise, a form of conduct protected flag desecration law. Now the center
means of protest speech that is protected under the First point of a debate regarding free speech
against the Reagan under the First Amendment. through burning an American Flag.
administration. Amendment
23 Buckley v Valeo 1976 Congress attempted Did the limits placed on The Court found that
to ferret out electoral expenditures by restricting them did not
corruption in political the Federal Election serve a government
campaigns by Campaign Act of 1971, interest great enough to
restricting financial and related provisions of warrant a curtailment
contributions to the Internal Revenue on free speech and
candidates. Among Code of 1954, violate the association.
other things, the law First Amendment's
set limits on the freedom of speech and
amount of money an association clauses?
individual could
contribute to a single
campaign.
The New York Times Did Alabama's libel law Brennan used the term
24 New York Times v Sullivan 1964 published an ad for unconstitutionally infringe "actual malice" to
contributing on the First Amendment's summarize this
donations to defend freedom of speech and standard, although he
Martin Luther King, freedom of press did not intend the usual
Jr., on perjury protections? meaning of a malicious
charges. It ad purpose.
contained several
minor factual
inaccuracies.
25 Dred Scott v Samford 1857 Dred Scott was a Was Dred Scott free or John McLean echoed
slave in Missouri. He slave? Curtis, finding the
resided in Illinois and majority improperly
in the Louisiana reviewed the claim’s
Territory, where substance when its
slavery was forbidden holding should have
by the Missouri been limited to
Compromise of 1820. procedure. He also
After returning to argued that men of
Missouri, Scott filed African descent could
suit in Missouri court be citizens because
for his freedom, they already had the
 claiming that his right to vote in five
residence in free states.
territory made him a
free man.
26 Miller v California 1973 Miller, after Is the sale and distribution In a 5-to-4 decision, the
conducting a mass of obscene materials by Court held that obscene
mailing campaign to mail protected under the materials did not enjoy
advertise the sale of First Amendment's First Amendment
"adult" material, was freedom of speech protection.
convicted of violating guarantee?
a California statute
prohibiting the
distribution of
obscene material.
27 Gibbons v Ogden 1824 A New York state law Does the Commerce In a concurring
gave Robert R. Clause give Congress opinion, Justice
Livingston and authority over interstate William Johnson
Robert Fulton a navigation? argued that the national
20-year monopoly government had
over navigation on exclusive power over
waters within state interstate commerce,
jurisdiction. negating state laws
interfering with the
exercise of that power.
28 Lemon v Kurtzman 1973 On June 28, 1971, the Was it an abuse of a The Court also The Court held that permitting payment
Supreme Court held court's discretion to allow recognized that the of allocated funds for 1970-1971 school
that Act 109 violated payment of allocated denial of payment year would not substantially undermine
the Establishment funds to nonpublic would have serious constitutional interest at stake.
Clause of the First religious schools, after financial consequences
Amendment. such allocations were on private schools
found unconstitutional by which relied on the
the Supreme Court? statute and the funds
allocated for the
1970-1971 school year.
29 US v Nixon 1974 The special Is the President's right to The Court held that The Court granted that there was a
prosecutor appointed safeguard certain neither the doctrine of limited executive privilege in areas of
by Nixon and the information, using his separation of powers, military or diplomatic affairs, but gave
defendants sought "executive privilege" nor the generalized preference to "the fundamental demands
audio tapes of confidentiality power, need for confidentiality
 conversations entirely immune from of high-level of due process of law in the fair
recorded by Nixon in judicial review? communications, administration of justice."
the Oval Office. without more, can
sustain an absolute,
unqualified,
presidential privilege.
30 Loving v. Virginia 1967 A couple was then Did Virginia's The Court held that The Court also held that the Virginia law
charged with antimiscegenation law distinctions drawn violated the Due Process Clause of the
violating the state's violate the Equal according to race were Fourteenth Amendment. "Under our
antimiscegenation Protection Clause of the generally "odious to a Constitution.”
statute, which banned Fourteenth Amendment? free people" and were
inter-racial marriages. subject to "the most
rigid scrutiny" under
the Equal Protection
Clause.
31 Griswold v Connecticut 1965 A gynecologist at the Does the Constitution The Court ruled that The Constitution does not explicitly
Yale School of protect the right of marital the Constitution did in protect a general right to privacy, the
Medicine, C. Lee privacy against state fact protect the right of various guarantees within the Bill of
Buxton, opened a restrictions on a couple's marital privacy against Rights create penumbras, or zones, that
birth control clinic in ability to be counseled in state restrictions on establish a right to privacy. Together, the
New Haven in the use of contraceptives? contraception. First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth
conjunction with Amendments create the right to privacy
Estelle Griswold, in marital relations.
who was the head of
Planned Parenthood
in Connecticut.
32 Shelley v Kraemer 1948 In 1945, an Does the enforcement of a The Court held that The enforcements of the racially
African-American racially restrictive standing alone, racially restrictive covenants in state court
family (the Shelleys) covenant violate the Equal restrictive covenants do violated the Equal Protection Clause of
moved into the Protection Clause of the not violate the the Fourteenth Amendment.
neighborhood. Louis Fourteenth Amendment? Fourteenth
Kraemer brought suit Amendment.
to enforce the
covenant and prevent
the Shelleys from
moving into their
house.
33 New Jersey v T.L.O. 1985 T.L.O. was charged Does the exclusionary The Court held that the The Court held that while the Fourth
with possession of rule apply to searches search of T.L.O.'s purse Amendment's prohibition on
 marijuana. Before conducted by school was reasonable under unreasonable searches and seizures
trial, T.L.O. moved to officials in public the circumstances applies to public school officials, they
suppress evidence schools? may conduct reasonable warrantless
discovered in the searches of students under their authority
search, but the Court notwithstanding the probable cause
denied her motion. standard that would normally apply to
searches under the Fourth Amendment.
34 Reno v ACLU 1997 Several litigants Did certain provisions of The Court held that the The Court added that since the First
challenged the the 1996 Communications Act violated the First Amendment distinguishes between
constitutionality of Decency Act violate the Amendment because "indecent" and "obscene" sexual
two provisions in the First and Fifth its regulations expressions, protecting only the former,
1996 Amendments by being amounted to a the Act could be saved from facial
Communications overly broad and vague in content-based blanket overbreadth challenges if it dropped the
Decency Act. their definitions of the restriction of free words "or indecent" from its text. The
types of internet speech. Court refused to address any Fifth
communications which Amendment issues.
they criminalized?

35 Reynolds v US 1879 Billy Joe Reynolds Does Reynolds have The Court held that The Court therefore reversed the Third
pleaded guilty to one standing under SORNA to without affirmative Circuit's decision and remanded the case
count of knowingly raise claims concerning action by the Attorney to determine if the Attorney General's
failing to register and the Attorney General's General, pre-act Interim Rule is a valid specification.
update a registration, Interim Rule? offenders would not be
in violation of the obligated to register
Sex Offender under SORNA.
Registration and
Notification Act
(SORNA).
36 Obergefell v. Hodges 2015 Groups of same-sex Does the Fourteenth Yes, yes. Justice The Constitution protects the
couples sued their Amendment require a Anthony M. Kennedy fundamental right of same-sex couples
relevant state state to license a marriage delivered the opinion to marry.
agencies to challenge between two people of the for the 5-4 majority.
the constitutionality same sex? The Court held that the
of those states' bans Does the Fourteenth Due Process Clause of
on same-sex marriage Amendment require a the Fourteenth
or refusal to state to recognize a Amendment guarantees
recognize legal marriage between two the right to marry as
same-sex marriages people of the same sex one of the fundamental
that was legally licensed liberties it protects.

37 Employment Division,
Department of Human
Resources of Oregon v
Smith
38 Santa Fe Independent School
District v Doe
39 Planned Parenthood of
Southeastern Pennsylvania v
Casey
and performed in another
state?
1990 The state appellate Can a state deny Yes. Justice Antonin The Court required this information to
court reversed the unemployment benefits to Scalia, writing for the consider the constitutionality of the
denial of benefits, a worker fired for using majority, observed that denial of benefits.
finding that the denial illegal drugs for religious the Court has never
violated their First purposes? held that an individual's
Amendment right to religious beliefs excuse
the free exercise of him from compliance
religion. The state with an otherwise valid
supreme court law prohibiting
affirmed the appellate conduct that
court. government is free to
regulate.
1990 One Mormon and one Does the Santa Fe Yes. In a 6-3 opinion The Court concluded that the football
Catholic family filed Independent School delivered by Justice game prayers were public speech
suit challenging this District's policy John Paul Stevens, the authorized by a government policy and
practice and others permitting student-led, Court held that the taking place on government property at
under the student-initiated prayer at District's policy government-sponsored school-related
Establishment Clause football games violate the permitting student-led, events.
of the First Establishment Clause of student-initiated prayer
Amendment. The the First Amendment? at football games
District Court violates the
enjoined the public Establishment Clause
Santa Fe Independent
School District from
implementing its
policy as it stood.
1992 The Pennsylvania Can a state require In a bitter 5-to-4 The justices imposed a new standard to
legislature amended women who want an decision, the Court determine the validity of laws restricting
its abortion control abortion to obtain again reaffirmed Roe, abortions.
law in 1988 and informed consent, wait 24 but it upheld most of
1989. Among the hours, if married, notify the Pennsylvania
new provisions, the their husbands, and, if provisions.
law required minors, obtain parental
informed consent and consent, without violating
a 24 hour waiting their right to abortion as
 period prior to the guaranteed by Roe v.
procedure. Wade?
40 Furman v Georgia 1972 Law enforcement Did the Georgia statute The Court held that the If the First Amendment means anything,
officers, under the infringe upon the freedom First and Fourteenth it means that a State has no business
authority of a of expression protected by Amendments telling a man, sitting alone in his own
warrant, searched the First Amendment? prohibited making house, what books he may read or what
Stanley's home private possession of films he may watch.
pursuant to an obscene materials a
investigation of his crime.
alleged bookmaking
activities.
41 Gregg v Georgia 1976 A jury found Gregg Is the imposition of the No. In a 7-to-2 The Court was not prepared to overrule
guilty of armed death sentence prohibited decision, the Court the Georgia legislature's finding that
robbery and murder under the Eighth and held that a punishment capital punishment serves as a useful
and sentenced him to Fourteenth Amendments of death did not violate deterrent to future capital crimes and an
death. On appeal, the as "cruel and unusual" the Eighth and appropriate means of social retribution
Georgia Supreme punishment? Fourteenth against its most serious offenders.
Court affirmed the Amendments under all
death sentence except circumstances.
as to its imposition
for the robbery
conviction.
42 Reynolds v Sims 1964 Lines dividing Did Alabama's In an 8-to-1 decision The Court was intruding on federalism
electoral districts had apportionment scheme authored by Justice principles protecting the states in their
resulted in dramatic violate the Fourteenth Earl Warren, the Court control of local matters.
population Amendment's Equal upheld the challenge to
discrepancies among Protection Clause by the Alabama system,
the districts. mandating at least one holding that Equal
representative per county Protection Clause
and creating as many demanded no less than
senatorial districts as there substantially equal
were senators, regardless state legislative
of population variances? representation for all
citizens
43 Korematsu v. United States 1944 In response to the Did the President and 6-3. he majority found The Court relied heavily on a 1943
Japanese attack on Congress go beyond their that the Executive decision, Hirabayashi v. U.S., which
Pearl Harbor during war powers by Order did not show addressed similar issues.
World War II, the implementing exclusion racial prejudice but
U.S. government and restricting the rights rather responded to the
 decided to require of Americans of Japanese strategic imperative of
Japanese-Americans descent? keeping the U.S. secure
to move into from invasion.
relocation camps as a
matter of national
security.
44 Swann v 1971 After the Supreme Were federal courts In a unanimous The Court ruled that remedial plans were
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Court's decision in constitutionally decision, the scope of to be judged by their effectiveness, and
Board 1954 in Brown v. authorized to oversee and district courts' the use of mathematical ratios or quotas
Board of Education, produce remedies for equitable powers to were legitimate "starting points" for
little progress had state-imposed remedy past wrongs solutions
been made in segregation? were broad and
desegregating public flexible.
schools.
45 Terry v Ohio 1968 Terry and two other Was the search and In an 8-to-1 decision, The Court found that the searches
men were observed seizure of Terry and the the Court held that the undertaken were limited in scope and
by a plain clothes other men in violation of search undertaken by designed to protect the officer's safety
policeman in what the the Fourth Amendment? the officer was incident to the investigation.
officer believed to be reasonable under the
"casing a job, a Fourth Amendment
stick-up." and that the weapons
seized could be
introduced into
evidence against Terry.
46 Bush v Gore 2000 On December 8, 2000 Did the Florida Supreme 7-2 that the Florida The Constitution requires that every vote
the Florida Supreme Court violate Article II Supreme Court's be counted.
Court ordered that the Section 1 Clause 2 of the scheme for recounting
Circuit Court in Leon U.S. Constitution by ballots was
County tabulate by making new election law? unconstitutional.
hand 9000 contested Do standardless manual
ballots from recounts violate the Equal
Miami-Dade County. Protection and Due
Process Clauses of the
Constitution?

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.