APUSH-Marbury v Madison (1803)Supreme Court Cases

Revolving around the "Midnight Judges" that John Adams tried to have approved before his Presidential term ended in 1801, this case is more important for the titanic precedent set by John Marshall then by the actual outcome of the decision. In his ruling, Marshall (the most important Supreme Court judge in American history) declared that this heretofore "inferior" third branch of government had "judicial review", or the power to determine if a law was constitutional or not. This court case elevated the judicial branch to equal footing with the executive and legislative branches.

The state of Maryland attempted to tax a branch of the Bank of the United States. John Marshall, showing his tendency to favor federal power over state power, declared that this tax was unconstitutional. In his decision, he famously stated, "The power to tax is the power to destroy." After the death of Alexander Hamilton in 1804 and the death of the Federalist Party in 1816, John Marshall proved to be the last link to the ideas first put forth by Hamilton.

In another John Marshall decision, the federal government was favored over the states. This time, the situation involved interstate commerce. The Court decided that Congress had the power to regulate any aspect of commerce that "crossed state lines", which of course included all forms of transportation. Marshall used the Commerce Clause of Article I (Section 8) of the Constitution to justify his ruling. Basically, because of this decision, Congress can pass ANY law regulating commerce, as long as that commerce is not confined to one particular state. Think about the long-term effects of this ruling, considering that at the time railroads, automobiles, and airplanes had not been invented. The power of the federal government was stretched considerably by Gibbons v Ogden, just the way Marshall liked it.

The Cherokee Indians were fighting to keep their homeland in the state of Georgia. President Andrew Jackson and most of the white government establishment desired to take their land because it was "good" farmland and the Cherokee did not deserve it. The Cherokee took their grievances to the courts, and eventually the case reached the Supreme Court. John Marshall ruled for the Cherokee, but Jackson ignored the ruling, defiantly barking that "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it." This was a clear violation of separation of powers, but Jackson did not care. Eight years later, the Cherokee were expelled to Oklahoma via the infamous Trail of Tears.

This was a highly controversial case that intensified the national debate over slavery. The case involved Dred Scott, a slave, who was taken from the slave state of Missouri 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. In other words, slavery was, according to the Court, completely constitutional.

This 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 Supreme Court paved the way for the repressive Jim Crow laws of the South. The lone dissenter on the Court, Justice John Marshall Harlan, protested, "The thin disguise of 'equal' accommodations...will not mislead anyone." Everybody knew that the schools, railroad cars, bathrooms designed for blacks would NOT be equal to those designed for whites.

One of the ways that the United States government tried to drum up support for World War I was through the stifling of dissent. A Socialist named Charles Schenck was sent to prison for distributing fliers to recently-drafted US citizens, saying that the draft was illegal and really another form of slavery. He was arrested under the guidelines of the Espionage Act (1918). Schenck claimed the Espionage Act was in obvious violation of the First Amendment, and the case made its way to the Supreme Court. There, in a decision explained by famous jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes, it was ruled that the Espionage Act was consistent with the First Amendment, and that one's words can be deemed illegal if constituting a "clear and present danger". The case was eventually overturned (in 1969), but the idea that a person's freedoms under the Constitution are not limitless - and that context matters - lives on today.

Considered one of the most significant Supreme Court decisions in American history, this ginormous ruling overturned Plessy v Ferguson, prohibited the racial segregation of children in public schools, and helped to plant the seeds for the Civil Rights movement that would later dominate the 1960's. In Plessy v Ferguson, the Court had instituted the "separate but equal" tag for public schools, water fountains, restaurants, and other public places. Yet it was an open secret that separate but equal was inherently unequal. The Court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren, declared what everyone knew to be the case. Oliver Brown, the father of an African-American child in Topeka, Kansas, sued the Topeka Board of Education on the basis that racial segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. Represented by future Supreme Court judge Thurgood Marshall, Brown won, and, in doing so, claimed a key victory in the fight against the Jim Crow Laws that had crippled African-Americans for decades.

Under the aforementioned Earl Warren, the Supreme Court expanded rights for criminal defendants. Clarence Gideon could not afford a defense attorney, and a Florida judge decided that he did not need one. Gideon was convicted of breaking/entering and sentenced to five years in prison. He appealed, citing the 6th amendment (which gives defendants the right to counsel). In a decision explained by Justice Hugo Black, Gideon's conviction was overturned. "You have the right to remain silent" (meaning you do not have to incriminate yourself - 5th amendment).... "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law".... "You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford it, one will be provided for you" (protections in the 6th amendment) These are known as Miranda rights for a reason. Ernesto Miranda of Phoenix, who had nothing more than a 9th grade education, was not informed of his Constitutional rights prior to police questioning. After a two-hour interrogation, he confessed to rape, kidnapping, and robbery. This confession was the sole evidence used to convict him of the crimes. He appealed to the Supreme Court in 1966, and won a 5-4 decision from the "Warren court". (Postscript - he did not get away with the crimes, as he was retried with other evidence and convicted again)

In 1970 a Texas state law was on the books that banned abortion in all cases except when the life of the mother was in the balance. With the sexual revolution and feminist movements of the late 1960's in full swing, a pregnant Dallas woman named Norma McCorvey ("Jane Roe") sued the Dallas district attorney, claiming that this state law violated her Constitutional rights. The Court, by a 7-2 decision, agreed, noting that Amendments 1/4/9/14 all protected an individual's "zone of privacy" against the encroachment of state laws. Abortions, they further argued, were within this "zone of privacy". It was controversial when delivered in 1973, and still is today. But in the end the Court ruled FOR the individual woman in an attempt to clarify what are the most basic rights of personal liberty and privacy. Legalizes abortion

The 2000 presidential election hinged on the state of Florida. Texas governor George W. Bush, after one recount, led by a mere 327 votes (out of 6 million). Vice-President Al Gore, under Florida law, could - and did - demand a manual recount. He chose four specific counties where voter complaints had been overwhelming. To make a long story short, the Supreme Court, after some lower court rulings, declared that this manual recount was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment (some ballots were protected more than others). This decision (5-4, all in favor were appointed by Republican presidents) effectively made Bush the winner. More importantly, though, this case demonstrated that the age-old role played by the Court since the Marbury v Madison decision nearly 200 years before - that of final arbiter of the Constitution, where there can be no further appeal - was still respected by winners and losers alike.