# data[].attributes.body
Decided: December 18, 1944

This case relates to the 9th and 10th amendment.

This changed the way people view these amendments because they were both violated. The 9th amendment was overstepped when people were forced to move out of their homes for no reason, which violates their rights even if not directly in the constitution. The 10th was violated as the government went beyond its war powers. This caused the amendments to be seen as not followed or too important in society any longer.

This connects to democracy and equality. This relates to democracy as the government overstepped its power and did not put it in the hands of the people when implementing these rules. This relates to equality as Japanese-Americans were only forced into camps because they were part Japanese which shows unequal treatment.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: May 17, 1954

This case challenges the 14th amendment.

This changed the view of the amendment as the court decided putting children in separate schools violated the equal protection clause. This caused the amendment to spread more for minorities and not only directed at majorities. The amendment was then seen as a true protection clause.

This is related to equality and rights. Equality because the clause was about protecting the fact that all people have equal rights. The people were segregated because of their skin color; that is not equality. It was also about rights. People's right to be treated fairly and not be forced to separate from others. The right to get an education.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: June 19, 1961

This case relates to the 4th amendment as it relates to search and seizure.

Despite finding unconstitutional things in her home, Mapp was not arrested as the search violated her rights. This shows that the interpretation of the right stayed true to the original writing. Meaning, that all people have a right to their stuff, and searching without the proper procedure is unethical.

This correlates to ideal rights. Since Mapp's right to her private belongings was taken away and violated. Which according to the constitution and ideals are basic conditions guaranteed to everyone.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: June 13, 1966

In this case, the 5th amendment is in the spotlight. This is because it deals with incriminating yourself.

Since the procedure was not done correctly, the interrogation was deemed not constitutional. So, the interpretation of the amendment was the same, defendants must be informed of their rights, including the one to remain silent.

I think this case is related to rights and opportunity. I think this because the defendant should have been informed of his right to remain silent and to an attorney. He also had a right to be informed of his rights which is what caused the interrogation to be unconstitutional. Opportunity because his unknown rights led to opportunity. Although guilty, he had an opportunity to become free with the right judge.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: February 24, 1969

This case is related to the 1st amendment as it deals with self-expression.

This changed the way people see the First Amendment as the court decided the student's rights were not violated and the school must approve what they wear. Causing the 1st amendment to not be recognized in all settings, especially no longer in school and not to minors.

This relates to equality, liberty, and rights. Equality because the case shows how rights that apply to adults don't apply to minors which is not equality. Liberty because the students should be able to wear and support who they want without enforcement. Finally, rights because it deals with their right to expression and freedom of speech. When the students were told they couldn't wear what they want to support what they wanted it destroyed that.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: June 7, 1971

This case correlates to the 1st amendment.

This did not change the interpretation of the 1st amendment. Since the court decided that the citizen could say whatever they wanted to, the right to freedom of speech was protected and the same as originally written.

This case is connected to rights. The right to say whatever you want in the name of expression. The whole case was about his right to say whatever he so chooses, and if what he said was unconstitutional.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: June 29, 1972

The 8th amendment is connected to this case.

This changed how people view the 8th amendment, more specifically, what is too cruel. This case caused wonder about the death penalty and if it should be unconstitutional for being too cruel and unusual.

This case deals with rights. This is because the case deals with people's right to the 8th amendment. The right to have a person's punishment match the crime. The question is if the death penalty violates people's rights is why the case is about rights.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: July 2, 1976

This case is linked to the 8th amendment.

Since the court decided that the death penalty is acceptable in certain situations the death penalty was seen as less normalized and used less liberally. I'm sure after this case the death penalty became less common causing the 8th amendment to be viewed as more strict and the cruel and unusual punishment aspect to be considered more seriously.

Rights are considered here as rights are the basic conditions guaranteed to each person. This explains every amendment in the bill of rights, including the 8th amendment. Which is the question, of what violates the 8th amendment. This case is about people's rights to have a balanced crime and punishment.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: June 25, 1982

This case deals with the 1st amendment.

It changed the way people see the amendment as it was decided that books can't be restricted from students because of social views. This caused people to see the bill of rights as applicable to students again.

This applies to rights as the question was if students' first amendment rights are restricted in schools. The video was about students' rights to read whatever they choose regardless of social stances. The right to press and information.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: January 15, 1985

This case also connects to the 4th amendment.

When the court ruled the search of her purse was constitutional the view of the 4th amendment altered. It was no longer seen as a right that applied in every setting and was now viewed as a right, not for minors.

The ideals of equality and rights are linked to this case. . As her rights to the fourth amendment were violated when her purse was searched because she was a minor. Showing that rights are not guaranteed to be equal.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: July 7, 1986

Bethel School District v. Fraser deals with the first amendment right to freedom of speech.

Much like a few other cases, the court's decision that the student's (inappropriate) speech was unconstitutional. caused people to continue to view the right as impartial to minors when in a school setting. So the interpretation did not change since Tinker v. Des Moines.

This case relates to rights. The right to freedom of speech. As the question of the case was whether he had the right to say what he wanted as in his first amendment. So because the case was about what he said in his speech it relates to rights.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: January 13, 1988

This case correlates with the 1st amendment's freedom to speech/press.

The court decision that school administrators could restrain their student's content caused people to think that once again the freedom of the press in the amendment is not prominent for students.

This relates to rights. This is because people can write and read what they want. The uncensored truth. This is the main problem in this case if authorities can censor school news.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: June 25, 1995

This case relates to the 9th and 4th amendment as it deals with rights not specifically in the constitution and search/seizure.

Since the court decision forcing the athletes to take a drug test was constitutional, the interpretation of the amendment stayed the same. Based on past cases, It was seen that schools have more authority over searching students than actual authorities who need a warrant and that amendments don't apply to minors in full. So, the interpretation stayed.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: April 19, 1997

This case is connected to the 8 amendments.

Since the court decided that the student getting physically harmed by a teacher was constitutional as it was the school's authority, the view of the amendment changed. It had now become that students were not protected from unfair punishment.

Much like the Furman v. Georgia case this relates to the ideal of rights. This is because this deals with students' rights to their amendments, specifically the 8th one. The right has no cruel and unusual punishment.

# data[].attributes.body
Decided: June 23, 2021

This deals with the first amendment.

Since the court stated that the school can not punish the student for off-campus activities, the view of the first amendment shifted again. Causing people to view the amendment as minor-oriented once again, just not under school grounds.

Liberty and rights are brought into the situation. She has the right to post whatever she wants to share outside of school. She has the right to her first amendment without
un-nesesarry restrictions; liberty.