Company: GREEN LOCAL SCHOOLS

Important Courts Cases in American History

Eras of the Supreme Court

The Marshall Court: 1801-1835  [Early Republic]
During the tenure of its longest serving chief justice, the Court established its power to review acts of Congress and state legislatures (judicial review).

Conservatives Reign: 1836-1909  [Civil War and Gilded Age]
The Court ruled in favor of states' rights, including the landmark Dred Scott decision written by Roger Taney's Court that upheld the institution of slavery.

The Rule of Reason: 1910-1918  [Progressive Era]
In a somewhat more liberal period, the Court under Edward White cited the "rule of reason" to back the use of antitrust laws against monopolies.

Return to the Right: 1919-1937  [Normalcy]
The Court under Charles Evans Hughes struck down a series of New Deal programs and protected business from federal and state regulation.

Age of Activism (including Warren Court): 1938-1980  [New Deal, Great Society, Vietnam War]
Justices shifted and began to support New Deal agencies beginning in 1938.  By the late 1950s and 1960s, Earl Warren's Court sharply expanded civil rights for blacks and the criminally accused.  Later, the Court approved abortion in the Roe v. Wade case.

Era of Restraint: 1981-present  [Reagan Revolution]
Reagan and George W. Bush appointees and Chiefs Justice William Rehnquist and John Roberts scaled back some of the more liberal Warren Court decisions.

Key Court Cases

[The most significant, or landmark, cases are underlined and in bold print.]

Chisholm v. Georgia (1793)
Two citizens of South Carolina sued Georgia in the Supreme Court.  The Court accepted the case and handed down a decision for the South Carolinians, who were acting as agents for a British creditor.  Georgia refused to participate in the case.  The case angered many, who saw it as an infringement on the sovereignty of the states.  According to English common law a sovereign power (Georgia) could not be sued without its permission.  The Eleventh Amendment ended such suits.

Ware v. Hylton (1796)
This case involved a conflict between the 1783 Treaty of Paris and a 1777 Virginia statute hindering British creditors in their attempt to recover debts owed by Americans.  In the treaty the United States pledged not to impede British attempts to secure payment of debts.  The Court ruled that, as specified in the Constitution, treaties overruled state laws.
Marshall Court  (1801-1835)

MARSHALL COURT____________________________________________________________________________

Marbury v. Madison (1803)
[Established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review, the power to declare unconstitutional an act of Congress.  By doing so, Marshall strengthened the judiciary in relation to the other branches of government.]

In March 1801, Secretary of State James Madison refused to give William Marbury a commission as a justice of the peace for Washington, D.C. after the John Adams administration had authorized the commission and numerous others as part of Adams' "midnight" judicial appointments.  Marbury sued under a writ of mandamus to obtain his commission.  The Court's decision, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, dismissed Marbury's suit because he had sued under a writ of mandamus, and the Constitution did not include such writs within its listing of the powers of the Supreme Court.  The Judiciary Act of 1789 authorized the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus, but, claimed Marshall, Congress could not enlarge the powers of the Supreme Court.  Therefore, that section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional.  This case is significant because it is the first time the Supreme Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional.  (The second time would not occur until the Dred Scott case in 1857.)  It also established this power, known as judicial review, for the Supreme Court, and placed the judicial branch on par with the other two branches of the federal government.

Fletcher v. Peck (1810)
[This case was the first to declare a state law void as a violation of the Constitution.]

Influenced by bribes the corrupt Georgia legislature sold land to speculators.  The outraged public elected virtually a new legislature at the next election, and the new legislature rescinded the previous sale.  The case involved the legality of the sale of a tract of land made before the second legislature rescinded the original transaction.  Chief Justice John Marshall wrote the decision.  The Georgia legislature could not interfere with a lawfully executed contract.  No matter how the original land speculators had obtained the land grant, Fletcher had made a legal, contractual purchase with which the legislature could not interfere.  The contract clause of the Constitution overrode the state law.

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
[Supported the use of the "elastic clause" to expand federal power, and established the principle of federal supremacy -- that the Constitution and federal laws overrule state laws when the two conflict.]

The state of Maryland levied a tax on the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the United States.  The cashier of the Bank refused to pay the tax.  The case raised the question of the constitutionality of the 1791 act of Congress which created the Bank, and the question of whether a state could tax the federal government.  Marshall's opinion supported the loose construction theory of the Constitution.  "Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional."  The act of Congress creating the Bank was constitutional.  In answering the second question the Court ruled that "the power to tax is the power to destroy."  Although the annual tax on the Baltimore branch was $15,000, once the principle of state taxation of the Bank was admitted, though, what is to prevent the state from raising the tax to a level that would bankrupt the Bank?  Therefore, the Maryland tax was unconstitutional.

Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819)
[Ruled that a state law changing a private college into a public institution was unconstitutional.]

In 1816 the New Hampshire state legislature took over Dartmouth College.  The board of trustees sued to regain control.  The Supreme Court ruled that the original charter granted in 1769 was a contract within the meaning of the contract clause of the Constitution.  The charter of a private corporation was protected by the Constitution and could not be altered by the people through their legislature.

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
[Established the basis for congressional regulation of interstate commerce, and reinforced the supremacy of federal law over state laws.]

At issue in this case was whether the New York statute that prohibited vessels licensed by the United States from navigating the waters of New York was unconstitutional and, therefore, void.  In this case, the Court put forth the position that Congress can legislate and regulate all matters of interstate commerce as long as there is some commercial connection with another state.  While interstate commerce is regulated by Congress, power to regulate "completely internal" commerce -- trade carried on in a state that does not affect other states -- is reserved to the states.

Worcester v. Georgia (1832)
Stated that treaties between the United States government and Indian nations are the supreme law of the land by declaring that the federal government, not the state of Georgia, had exclusive jurisdiction over the Cherokee Nation's territory.  President Andrew Jackson supported Georgia in defying this ruling, and Native American removal followed.
___________________________________________________________________________________________

Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1837)
[Placed the interests of the state (and thus the people) above those of private business in denying the Charles River Bridge Company an exclusive right to maintain the only bridge over the Charles River.]

The Charles River Bridge Company sued to prevent the state of Massachusetts from authorizing the construction of a new bridge across the Charles River.  The company believed that their contract gave them an exclusive right to maintain a bridge over the river.  Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, in his first significant decision, ruled that no charter granted to a private corporation permanently vested rights that might harm the public interest.  Taney wrote, "the continued existence of a government would be of no great value, if by implications and presumptions, it was disarmed of the powers necessary to accomplish the ends of its creation; and the functions it was designed to perform, transferred to the hands of privileged corporations."  The rights of the community supersede a broad interpretation of the private rights of a corporation.  "While the rights of property are sacredly guarded, we must not forget that the community also have rights...."  It is not the duty of the legislature to specify what the corporation charter does not say.

Commonwealth v. Hunt (1842)
[Decision of the Massachusetts state court]

Affirmed the rights of trade unions to organize and to use strikes as a tactic.  Despite the decision in Massachusetts, other courts nationwide continued to view unions as illegal conspiracies.

Scott v. Sandford (1857)
[Declared that African-Americans were not citizens which could have dismissed the case at that point since it was brought by an African- American slave.  Taney went further, however, by ruling that slaves were property and that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because Congress has no power to exclude slavery from a territory.  This furthered the sectional tension brewing in the years before the Civil War.  Decision would later be overturned by the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.]

Dred Scott was a slave owned by an army doctor who took him into Illinois and part of the Wisconsin Territory.  Slavery had been outlawed in these two areas by the Northwest Ordinance and Illinois law and by the Missouri Compromise of 1820.  Scott sued for his freedom based on the argument that residence on free soil made him a free man.  The case quickly became a test case, with the doctor's widow selling Scott to her brother, Sanford (actual spelling; official records have the name misspelled, Sandford), in New York.  The involvement of two different states forced the case into the federal courts.  All the judges wrote separate opinions in the case, which caused the debate to go on long after the decisions.  The majority held that Scott was not a citizen and that free blacks or slaves could not be citizens of the United States.  The judges could have ended their explanation here.  Two Northern judges, however, announced their intention to write long dissenting opinions against the majority, and the majority then felt forced to refute these dissents.  But the majority itself was divided in its reasoning, so each of the majority justices wrote his own opinion.  In answering the key questions of the case (Could Congress exclude slavery from the territories?  If slaves are property, is a slaveowner not protected by the Fifth Amendment from being deprived of his property without compensation?), the Taney Court declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional because it prohibited a citizen from taking his property into the territories.  The decision, which was encouraged by President Buchanan, was welcomed by the South and largely refuted by Northerners.  Dred Scott's owner later freed him and his family.

Ex parte Milligan (1866)
[Ruled that a civilian cannot be tried in military courts when civilian courts are available.]

Lambdin Milligan, a citizen of Indiana, was arrested for subversive activities in support of the Southern cause during the Civil War.  He was tried, convicted, and sentenced to die by a military court in Indiana in spite of the fact that the Indiana civilian court system was functioning.  Milligan's appeal to the Supreme Court raised the question of the dividing line between civil and military control over civilians during wartime.  The Supreme Court ruled that while the Constitution permitted the suspension of habeas corpus, it did not suspend the judicial powers of federal courts.  Military tribunals could be established, but when the federal courts were "open and ready" no other court could claim jurisdiction.  "The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances."  Milligan sued for damages for false imprisonment.  A jury awarded him five dollars.

Munn v. Illinois (1877)
At issue was whether the regulation of railroad rates by the state of Illinois deprived the railroad companies of property without due process of law.  The Court upheld the Illinois law because the movement and storage of grain were considered to be closely related to the public interest.  This type of economic activity could be governed by state legislatures, whereas purely private contracts could only be governed by the courts.

Civil Rights Cases (1883)
[Determined that racial discrimination by private persons did not place the "badge of slavery" on African-Americans nor keep them in servitude.  Further stated that neither Congress nor the Court had the power to deal with private acts of discrimination.]

In a decision consistent with the Slaughterhouse Cases, the Supreme Court narrowly defined the civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment in this case.  The Civil Rights Act of 1875 made it a crime for any individual to deny full and equal use of public conveyances and public places such as hotels, trains, railroads, theaters, and restaurants.  The Court declared that the Fourteenth Amendment protected individuals from state action, not individual action.  "The wrongful act of an individual unsupported by any such state authority, is simply a private wrong, or a crime of that individual...."  Discouraged, Congress did not pass another civil rights act until 1957.

Wabash, St. Louis, and Pacific Railway Company v. Illinois (1886)
[Forbade any state to set rates, even within its own borders, on railroad traffic entering from or bound for another state.  The decision paved the way for the creation of the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887.]

Popularly known as the Wabash case, this decision is significant because it added to the push for the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887.  An Illinois law prohibited the infamous practice of different rates for long and short haul traffic.  The Court ruled that states could only regulate intrastate (within one state) commerce, not interstate (between two or more states) commerce.  Since the federal government had not yet begun to regulate railroads crossing state lines, the railroads were legally beyond control.

Pollock v. The Farmers' Loan and Trust Company (1895)
[Declared that the income tax under the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act (1894) was unconstitutional.]

In re Debs (1895)
[Reinforced that the right of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to the commerce that is conducted by railroad and highway.  Further ruled that the federal government has the right to intervene forcibly to eliminate monopolies in transportation of people, property, and mail.]

At issue was whether the federal government has the constitutional authority to stop railroad workers from striking.  The Court upheld the authority of the federal government to halt the strike.  The Court reasoned that the federal government has "enumerated powers" found in Article 1, Section 8, to "regulate commerce...among the several states," and to establish post offices and post roads.  When the American Railway Union struck, it interfered with the railroad's ability to carry commerce and mail which benefited the needs and "general welfare" of all Americans.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
[Gave legal justification for racial segregation by ruling that separate facilities for different races were legal as long as those facilities were equal to one another.  Decision would later be overturned by Brown v. Board of Education (1954).]

The question in this case was whether laws which provided for the separation of races violated the rights of blacks as guaranteed by the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  The Court held that the Louisiana Act, which stated that" all railway companies were to proved equal but separate accommodations for white and black races," did not violate the Constitution.  The law did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment, which gave all blacks citizenship, and forbade states from passing any laws which would deprive blacks their constitutional rights.  The Plessy doctrine of "separate but equal" was later overturned by Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954), which held "separate but equal" to be unconstitutional.

Insular Cases (1901)
[Confirmed the right of the federal government to place tariffs on goods entering the United States from U.S. territories on the grounds that "the Constitution does not follow the flag."]

Northern Securities Company v. U.S. (1904)
[Case was brought by the federal government as part of Theodore Roosevelt's "trustbusting" using the Sherman Antitrust Act.  Court ruled that the Northern Securities Company was formed only to eliminate competition and ordered it to be dissolved.]

Lochner v. New York (1905)
[Established the Court's power to oversee state regulations by ruling that a New York law limiting bakers to 10-hour workdays and 60-hour workweeks in order to protect public health was unconstitutional because it interfered with the workers' right to sell their labor to their employers.  Decision was overturned by Bunting v. Oregon (1917).]

At issue was whether a law which limited the number of house bakery employees were allowed to work interfered with the bakery owner's right to make employer/employee contracts.  The Court held that even though states have the power to regulate in the areas of health, safety, morals, and public welfare, the New York law in question was not with the limits of the these "police powers" of the State.  This decision marked the beginning of the "substantive due process" era, in which the Court struck down a number of state laws that interfered with an individual's economic and property rights.  It was overturned twelve years later in Bunting v. Oregon (1917).

Muller v. Oregon (1908)
[The Court upheld an Oregon law that limited women to a 10-hour workday in laundries or factories in order to protect women's health.  The Court stated that the need of the state to protect women's health outweighed the liberty to make a contract for labor.  The Court ruled otherwise in Lochner v. New York (1905).  This was the first case to use the "Brandeis brief."]

The State of Oregon passed a law prohibiting women from working in factories or laundries more than ten hours in any day.  At question in this case was whether Oregon, through its regulation of women's work hours, violated the "privileges and immunities" clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by forbidding the employment of women for more than ten hours a day in laundries and factories.  The Court held that the Oregon law that barred women from certain factory and laundry work to be correct, and sustained the legislation.

Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918)
[Declared the Keating-Owen Act (1916), a law limiting child labor, unconstitutional on the grounds that it infringed on a state's authority in such matters.]

Schenck v. U.S. (1919)
[Upheld the Espionage Act (1917) which declared that people who interfered with the war effort were subject to imprisonment.  The Court established limits on free speech by setting the "clear and present danger" standard to determine when free speech can be restricted.]

Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923)
[Declared unconstitutional a minimum wage law for women on the grounds that it denied women freedom of contract.]

Schecter Poultry Corporation v. U.S. (1935)
[Declared the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) unconstitutional because it delegated legislative power to the executive, it lacked constitutional authority for such legislation, and it sought to regulate businesses that were wholly intrastate in character.]

At issue was whether the National Industrial Recovery Act, which gave the president the authority to regulate certain aspects of commerce during the Depression, was an unconstitutional delegation of presidential power.  The Court held that the delegation of power made by the NIRA was unconstitutional.  The Court held that Congress cannot delegate legislative power to the president, even under the extraordinary conditions of the Depression.  The NIRA was declared unconstitutional because it exceeded the commerce power that had been given to Congress by the Constitution.

Korematsu v. U.S. (1944)
[Ruled that forcible relocation of Japanese-Americans to internment camps during World War II was legal and justified.]

Exclusion Order #34 and Executive Order #9066 of 1942, which had been issued to protect the West Coast from acts of espionage and sabotage, required all Japanese-Americans living in restricted areas to go to inland relocation centers.  At issue was whether this violated the Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection of the law and Fifth Amendment right to life, liberty, and property.  The Court ruled that the government was permitted to deny the Japanese-Americans their constitutional rights because of military considerations.  Such exclusion was not beyond the war powers of Congress and the president since their interest in national security was "compelling."

Dennis v. United States (1951)

Eugene Dennis, a leader of the Communist Party in the United States, was arrested for violation of the Smith Act.  The Smith Act prohibited advocation of the overthrow of the United States Government by force and violence.  The Court found that the Smith Act did not violate Dennis' First Amendment right to free speech.  Although free speech is a guaranteed right, it is not unlimited.  The right to free speech may be lifted if the speech presents a clear and present danger to overthrow any government in the United States by force or violence.  Since the speech made by Dennis advocated his position that the government should be overthrown, it represented a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.

WARREN COURT______________________________________________________________________________

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954)
[Ruled that segregation in public educational facilities creates “inherent” inequality and nullified the concept of "separate but equal"  by overturning the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896).]

In 1951 Oliver Brown filed a suit on behalf of his daughter, Linda, who was bused to a black school over twenty blocks away.  Another elementary school for whites was only five blocks away.  Three other cases -- from South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware -- were also filed at this time.  This is one of the most significant cases ever decided by the Supreme Court.  Recognizing the impact of this case the Court entertained arguments from all quarters.  Fifty-one separate briefs were filed along with those involved in the case.  The majority opinion, 8-0, relied heavily on sociological and psychological factors as well as legal arguments.  Segregation had to end.  "We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place.  Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."  According to the Court, even if the facilities were physically equal, the children of the minority group would still receive an inferior education.  The Court did not order immediate compliance, but instead directed lower courts to implement the order "with all deliberate speed."  This speed was lacking for a number of years.

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
[Ruled that citizens are protected against unlawful search and seizure by the states as well as by the federal government.]

This case was the first of a series of decisions that extended the Fourteenth Amendment to protect citizens against state infringement.  The Supreme Court used the "due process" clause to make the Bill of Rights apply to state officials.  The Mapp case overturned a state court conviction based on evidence obtained by an unreasonable search and seizure.  (Since 1914, the Supreme Court had barred federal use of illegally obtained evidence.)

Baker v. Carr (1962)
[Upheld the principle that population is the only acceptable basis for the apportionment of seats in a legislative body.  Established that the Court has jurisdiction over state reapportionment cases when the reapportionment threatens voters' rights.]

Engel v. Vitale (1962)
[Reinforced the separation of church and state when the Court ruled that use of the public schools to encourage prayer or other religious practices is a direct violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.]

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
[Ruled that to deny legal representation to defendants who cannot afford to pay for it is a violation of those individuals' constitutional rights.]

Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)
[Ruled that a defendant must have access to an attorney before being questioned by the police.]

Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S. (1964)
[Declared unconstitutional the racial segregation of private facilities which engaged in interstate commerce, upholding the recent Civil Rights Act of 1964.]

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
[Established the requirement to inform people accused of crimes that they have the right to remain silent and receive legal representation before they say anything that can be held against them in court.]

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
[Ruled that certain kinds of nonverbal communication (in this case, black armbands worn by public school students to protest the Vietnam War) can be protected under the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech.]

___________________________________________________________________________________________

New York Times Company v. U.S. (1971)
[Granted the media more power against governmental secrecy.]

Roe v. Wade (1973)
[Ruled that state laws that criminalize abortion are unconstitutional, and state laws could not restrict abortion rights in the first trimester (first three months) of pregnancy.]

U.S. v. Nixon (1974)
[Limited the president's right to confidentiality, and gave the federal courts the right to decide when and how it should be limited.  Rejected Nixon's claim to absolute executive privilege in refusing to release his secret tape recordings of his Oval Office conversations.]

Bakke v. Regents of the University of California (1978)
[In a very weak and unclear decision, the Court essentially upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action programs that used race as a basis of selecting participants.]