# data[].attributes.body
-Date: January 1917
-Did Schenck's conviction violate his First Amendment right to freedom of speech?
-No the court ruled the espionage act did not violate the first amendment and they exercised congress' wartime authority appropriately.
-Unanimous Decision in favor of the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1896
Question: Does segregation violate the 14th Amendment?
Decision: As long as separate-but-equal facilities (in this case train cars) were provided, segregation is allowed.
Vote: 7 majority, 1 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
-Date: January 1964
-Did Alabama's libel law unconstitutionally infringe on the First Amendment?
- The court ruled there was not enough evidence to show the ad for donations was reckless or false.
- It was a unanimous decision in favor of the New York Times.

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1969
Question: Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students' freedom of speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment?
Decision: The Supreme Court held that the armbands represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it. The Court also held that the students did not lose their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property.
Vote: 7 Majority, 2 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1986
Questions: With the First Amendment being so broad, what qualifies as "freedom of speech"?
Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that Fraser's punishment in regards to his speech was fair and did not violate the first amendment, for he received a warning and the school's policy relating to obscene language was known.
Votes: 7 majority, 2 dissenting

# data[].attributes.headline
Your boxes should look something like the one below for each court case. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Your boxes should look something like the one below for each court case. 

# data[].attributes.body
1. Date

2. Constitutional issue (posed as a question)

3. Decision (answer to question)

4. Votes for majority/dissenting opinion

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1984
Questions: Is the burning/desecration of the American flag a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment?
Decision: Burning or desecration of the American flag is a right protected by the First Amendment. The Court ruled that the government not prohibit expression of an idea simply because the concept of it is offensive to an audience.
Votes: 5 majority, 4 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1803
Questions: Which branch of government is most powerful?
Decision: They are all equal as this cases establishes the ability of the Supreme Court to determine the Constitutionality of a law
Votes: 4 majority
2 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
At the end of each column provide an evaluation of what has changed or what has stayed the same over time for the given category.

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1962
Questions: Should public schools be allowed to compose and recite a daily prayer?
Decision: Public schools are not allowed to have a prayer being recited in school, as it violates the Establishment Clause.
Votes: 6 majority, 1 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1963
Question:Did the Pennsylvania law requiring public school students to participate in classroom religious exercises violate the religious freedom of students as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?
Decision: Public schools cannot sponsor Bible readings and recitations of the Lord’s Prayer under the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
Vote: 8 Majority, 1 Dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
-Date: January 1997
-Did Washington's ban on physician assisted-suicide violate the Fourteenth Amendment?
-No as the court decided it is not a fundamental liberty to have physician assisted suicide.
-Unanimous in favor of Washington.

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 2000
Questions: Does the Santa Fe Independent School District's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that it was violating the Establishment Clause, for the speeches were taking place during a district-sponsored event.
Votes: 6 majority, 3 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date:1973
Question: Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?
Decision:The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Votes: 7 majority, 2 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 2010
Question: Does the government violate a federal contract employee's constitutional right to privacy by asking her whether she has received counseling or treatment for recent illegal drug use in the past year, or by asking her references if they have any reason to believe she is unsuited to work in a federal facility?
Decision: They ruled that the background checks were not an invasion of policy, and since they were federal employees, it was important that the background checks were conducted.
Votes: 8 majority (unanimous)

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 2011
Questions: Are corporations allowed to invoke the concept of personal privacy to prevent the government from releasing documents about them?
Decision: No, corporations cannot invoke personal privacy to prevent things from being released about them by the federal government.
Votes: Unanimous majority

# data[].attributes.body
A change is that it has become more specific definition.
A continuity is that symbols=favor

# data[].attributes.body
It has changed because now people can see whatever they want with the new technology.

# data[].attributes.body
Date:1963
-Question: Did the court deny his 6th amendment right to a public defender?
-Decision: The court decided the Sixth Amendment's guarantees a right to assistance of counsel applies to criminal defendants in state court by way of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-Opinion: A unanimous decision in favor of Gideon.

# data[].attributes.headline
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States

# data[].attributes.subject
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1935
Question: Does Congress have the power to grant the President regulating abilities of companies without standards for all?
Decision: Congress can not grant the power to the President, as it violates the non-delegation doctrine.
Opinion: Unanimous majority, 0 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1974
Question: Is the President's right to safeguard certain information, using his "executive privilege" confidentiality power, entirely immune from judicial review?
decision: No. The Court held that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified, presidential privilege. The Court granted that there was a limited executive privilege in areas of military or diplomatic affairs, but gave preference to "the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of justice." Therefore, the president must obey the subpoena and produce the tapes and documents. Nixon resigned shortly after the release of the tapes.
Vote: 8 Majority, 1 Dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1964
Question: Was Escobedo denied the right to counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment?
Decision: It was violating the Sixth Amendment. He was not told his rights, and he was denied having a lawyer.
Votes: 5 majority, 4 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date:1856-1857
-Question:Was Dred Scott free or slave?
-Decision: The majority held that “a negro, whose ancestors were imported into [the U.S.], and sold as slaves,” whether enslaved or free, could not be an American citizen and therefore did not have standing to sue in federal court.
-Opinion: A 7-2 decision in Sandfords favor.

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1952
Question: Does the segregation of public education based solely on race violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Decision: "Separate but equal" was deemed not equal by the Supreme Court, and it violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
Decision: 9 majority (unanimous)

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1964
Question: Did Congress, in passing Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, exceed its Commerce Clause powers by depriving places of public accommodation of the right to choose their own customers?
Decision: The hotel did not have the right to deny service to African Americans for it affected commerce in that area. It also violated Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Votes: 9 majority (unanimous)

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 1961
-Question: Were the confiscated materials protected by the First Amendment?
-Decision: The court decided that all searches that violate the 4th amendment cannot be used in court.
-Opinion: 6-3 decision in favor of Mapp.

# data[].attributes.body
Date:1966
Question: Does the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination extend to the police interrogation of a suspect?
Decision: The Fifth Amendment requires that law enforcement officials advise suspects of their right to remain silent and to obtain an attorney during interrogations while in police custody.
votes: 5 majority, 4 dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Date: 2000
Question:Did the Florida Supreme Court violate Article II Section 1 Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution by making new election law? Do standardless manual recounts violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Constitution?

Decision: Noting that the Equal Protection clause guarantees individuals that their ballots cannot be devalued by "later arbitrary and disparate treatment," the per curiam opinion held 7-2 that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional. Even if the recount was fair in theory, it was unfair in practice.
votes: 7 Majority, 2 Dissenting

# data[].attributes.body
Change: The definition of civil rights has changed to be more specific and more equal for all.

# data[].attributes.body
Date:1944
Question:Did the President and Congress go beyond their war powers by implementing exclusion and restricting the rights of Americans of Japanese descent?
Decision: The court decided they did not violate any rights.
Opinion:6-3 in favor of the United States