# data[].attributes.body
texas v.s johnson

# data[].attributes.body
Gideon v.s Wainwright

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get access to files anywhere through secure cloud storage and file backup for your photos, videos, files and more with Google Drive.

# data[].attributes.body
lemon v kurtzman

# data[].attributes.body
In this court case, the defendant, Clarence Earl Gideon was sentenced to 5 years in jail in florida without a representative being provided. Florida argued that you only need representation given to you if you are in danger of the death penalty. After his sentence, Gideon petitioned for a case in the Florida supreme court and was denied, but accepted by the National Supreme Court. This case was Unanimously decided as a win for Gideon. They decided that in order to have a fair due process as described in the 14th and 6th amendment, every defended should be provided representation by the state.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
_Schenckv._U.S._

Who is the defendant in this case? _________schenck__________

Who is the plaintiff in this case? ___________U.S._______________________

What claims are being made by the plaintiff? That they violated the espionage act and were potentially causing panic.

Where did this case originate? __Schenck and elizabeth baer were mailing leaflets encouraging draftees to resist and not follow orders.___

In what year did this case originate? ____1917_____

In what year was this case decided by the Supreme Court? ____1919____

What was the majority opinion of the Supreme Court (winning side)? U.S.

How many justices held the majority opinion? _____all_____

What was the dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court (losing side)? Schenck

How many justices held the dissenting opinion? none

What amendment is involved in this case? The first amendment

Does this case deal with a civil liberty or civil right?    Civil right

Why is this case considered a “Landmark”? How did it affect the United States? It sorted out that speech creating a clear or present danger is not protected under the first amendment. In order to maintain social order the first amendment cant protect every individuals freedom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
Miranda Perez

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get access to files anywhere through secure cloud storage and file backup for your photos, videos, files and more with Google Drive.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag to protest the Reagan administration policies. This case deals directly with civil rights because it relates back to the first amendment. Johnson has the freedom to burn the flag under the freedom of speech. In 1989, the case was decided in a 5-4 vote. The court agreed that the flag has a unique status, but was considered to be a form of symbolic speech as confirmed by the First Amendment. This allowed Johnson to not be convicted.

# data[].attributes.body
Description:

Miranda V Arizona was a landmark case in which Ernesto Miranda acted as the plaintiff against the defendant, the state of Arizona. The case was started in Pheonix Arizona after Miranda was arrested, questioned, and interrogated for the kidnapping, 🤬, and robbery of an 18 year old woman. Mirnada claimed that he was unaware of his right to remain silent or to an attorney and was coerced into a confession of the crime without legal counsel. The Supreme Court decided that any evidence gained from questioning when the defendant’s rights weren;t made aware or were overlooked could not be used in a court of law as actual evidence. This was a Landmark case because it is the reason officers must inform you of your rights while you are being arrested and can’t use any evidence they may coerce out of someone if their rights aren’t upheld.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
TexasVSJohnson court case
The defendent in this case was Gregory Lee Johnson had burned down an American Flag at a protest. He was sentnved a year but it was overturned by a texas court because they believed it was a symbolic way of free speech. The supreme court ended up hearing the case in march of 1989 and the decision of the case was made in 1989 as well. Gregory also argued that that the burning of the flag was freedom of speech which his argument was the main reason why his sentence was overturned. The majority opinion of five justices agreed with Johnson that yes it was free speech. There was a punishment but he could not go to jail for the burning of the flag itself. The unpopular opinion was that the courts had the right to sentence him because it was not under the first amendment and it had nothing to do with freedom of speech. The burning of the flag was very symbolic and this case has changed the idea of freedom of speech and all it can uphold. The U.S Flag is a protected form of speech under the first amendment to the U.S constitution.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
Schenck v. United States

# data[].attributes.body
Who was involved: New York Times and United States
Plaintiff: New York Times
Defendant: United States
Where: New York, NY, US
What the case was about: Daniel Ellsberg published pages of documents that exposed government's actions during the Vietnam war, which became the Pentagon papers. The government wanted to prevent Times from publishing more and ordered a prior restraint.
What the Supreme Court decided: They ruled 6-3 that the prior restraint was unconstitutional.
Why is it a landmark: Because it defended the First amendment right of free press against prior restraint by the government.
When was the case decided: 1971
What precedent was established: The New York times could publish the classified Pentagon Papers without risk of government punishment
What lasting impact did the case have: That publication wouldn't be a problem for national security. There is freedom of speech for press without punishment.

# data[].attributes.body
Gideon vs Wainwright

# data[].attributes.body
Miranda VS Arizona

# data[].attributes.location_name
Dallas City Hall, Marilla Street, Dallas, TX, USA

# data[].attributes.headline
Dallas City Hall, Marilla Street, Dallas, TX, USA

# data[].attributes.subject
Dallas City Hall, Marilla Street, Dallas, TX, USA

# data[].attributes.body
Miller vs Cali.
7th block

# data[].attributes.location_name
Supreme Court of the United States, First Street Northeast, Washington, DC, USA

# data[].attributes.headline
Supreme Court of the United States, First Street Northeast, Washington, DC, USA

# data[].attributes.subject
Supreme Court of the United States, First Street Northeast, Washington, DC, USA

# data[].attributes.body
this is where my court case was from

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.location_name
Union Square, Manhattan, New York, NY, USA

# data[].attributes.headline
Union Square, Manhattan, New York, NY, USA

# data[].attributes.subject
Union Square, Manhattan, New York, NY, USA

# data[].attributes.body
Lemon v. Kurtzman
Defendant: Pennsylvania and Rhode Island
Plaintiff: Citizens of Pennsylvania and Rhode Island
Facts of the case: Citizens that had children in public school were upset when they heard that christian school where getting extra funding so they took the state to court.
Claims of the Plaintiff: The state had violated their first amendment right.
When was the case decided: 1971
What was the majority opinion: That the state had violated the first amendment right.
How many held the majority decision: 8
What was the dissenting opinion: giving school extra money based on religion was not a violation of the constitution
How many held the dissenting opinion: 1
What made this a landmark case: After this case the government established the lemon test. The lemon test is a test that find out if school are receiving extra funding based on religion.

# data[].attributes.body
Lemon v. Kurtzman

# data[].attributes.location_name
District Court, North Pine Street, Tremont, Pennsylvania, USA

# data[].attributes.headline
District Court, North Pine Street, Tremont, Pennsylvania, USA

# data[].attributes.subject
District Court, North Pine Street, Tremont, Pennsylvania, USA

# data[].attributes.body
New York Times v US

# data[].attributes.body
Tinker V.s. Desmoines

# data[].attributes.body
Miller Vs. California

# data[].attributes.body
Miller vs. California

# data[].attributes.body
Schenck v United States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
Lemon vs. Kurtzman

# data[].attributes.body
Miranda Perez 4th b

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
By: Mina Embarak

# data[].attributes.body
Ohio vs. Mapp:
The impact of this case further strengthens the 4th amendment. After police illegally searched Dollree Mapp's home in May 1957, they obtained illegal contraband and tried to use it against her in a court of law. After everything was all said and done Mapp wasn't held accountable for any of the objects found in her home, and the Supreme court ruled that a warrant had to be present for any contraband to be used against someone; making the Exclusionary Rule.

# data[].attributes.body
Click on thumbnail, Mapp v Ohio comic is attached.

# data[].attributes.body
Tinker v. Des Moines

# data[].attributes.body
Schenck Vs. United states

Charles schenck and Elizabeth Baer where envolved.

the plaintiff was Charles Schenck

The defendent was the United States

The case got started in the district court for the eastern district of Pennsylvania

The case was about Schenck socialists Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer distributed leaflets declaring that the draft violated the Thirteenth Amendment prohibition against involuntary servitude

what did the supreme court decide they decided that the freedom of speach protection aforded

the landmark was the confiction of schench and bear

the case was decided on march 3, 1919

what precedent was established by the case of united states leagle case of the freedom of speach

the lasting impact of the case was that the freedom of speach is no unlimited

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.location_name
Dallas City Hall, Marilla Street, Dallas, TX, USA

# data[].attributes.headline
Dallas City Hall, Marilla Street, Dallas, TX, USA

# data[].attributes.subject
Dallas City Hall, Marilla Street, Dallas, TX, USA

# data[].attributes.body
Ethan George