Landmark Supreme Court Cases by Perezconstanti, Jesus D - 0868600 https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito Jesus Perez - Period 7 en-us 2020-12-10 18:33:30 UTC 2025-10-25 15:55:28 UTC hello@padlet.com Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) 0868600 https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1007475091
  • Explain the case, what was it about.

    • Is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that in criminal cases states are required under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to provide an attorney to defendants who are unable to afford their own attorneys

      2. What did the Supreme Court            say in their decision about this         case.

    The court declined to appoint counsel for Gideon

      3. What were the social    
           implications after this court             cases was decided and why             is it considered a Landmark.

    Approximately 2,000 individuals were freed in Florida alone as a result of the Gideon decision

    ]]>     2020-12-10 18:39:52 UTC https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1007475091     Engel v. Vitale (1962) 0868600 https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014393474
    Explain the case, what was it about

    held that official recitation of prayers in public schools violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause

    What did the Supreme Court say in their decision about this case

    The Court rejected the defendant's arguments that students were not asked to observe any specific established religion, that the traditional heritage of the nation was religious, and that the prayer was voluntary

    What were the social implications after this court cases was decided and why is it considered a Landmark.

    Students who did not wish to say it could choose to remain silent or stand outside the room, and face no penalty]]>     2020-12-14 00:15:08 UTC https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014393474     Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 0868600 https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014411727 Explain the case, what was it about.

    In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.

    What did the Supreme Court say in their decision about this case


    Miranda has become embedded in routine police warnings to the point where the warnings have become part of our national culture


    What were the social implications after this court cases was decided and why is it considered a Landmark.


    The ruling was also based on the assertions that the Fifth Amendment privilege is “fundamental to our system of constitutional rule” and that to inform the accused of their rights is “expedient [and] simple]]>     2020-12-14 00:26:36 UTC https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014411727     New York Times v. U.S. (1971) 0868600 https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014433168 Explain the case, what was it about.


    The decision by the New York Times and Washington Post to print illegally leaked, classified documents about American involvement in the Vietnam War sparked a First Amendment battle between the highest levels of government and two of the most respected newspapers in the country.


    What did the Supreme Court say in their decision about this case



    It first stated that "Any system of prior restraints of expression comes to this Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity". The purpose of this statement was to make the presence of the inherent conflict between the Government's efforts and the First Amendment clear. The decision then stated that the government "thus carries a heavy burden of showing justification for the imposition of such a restraint"


    What were the social implications after this court cases was decided and why is it considered a Landmark.



    the real issue for the Court was whether there was a sufficient justification for prior restraint, which would be a suspension of the newspapers' First Amendment rights to freedom of the press. The First Amendment states that no federal law can be made abridging the freedom of the press, but a few landmark cases in the 20th century had established precedents creating exceptions to that rule, among them the "clear and present danger" test first articulated by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. in Schenck v. United States]]>     2020-12-14 00:39:39 UTC https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014433168     Lynch v. Donnelly (1984) 0868600 https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014442487 Explain the case, what was it about.


    The Supreme Court decision Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984), upheld the constitutionality of a seasonal holiday display that included a manger scene, or creche, on government property, finding that it was not in violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.


    What did the Supreme Court say in their decision about this case


    The Establishment Clause prohibits government from making adherence to a religion relevant in any way to a person's standing in the political community. Government can run afoul of that prohibition in two principal ways


    What were the social implications after this court cases was decided and why is it considered a Landmark.


    government endorsement or disapproval of religion]]>     2020-12-14 00:45:27 UTC https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014442487     Texas v. Johnson (1989) 0868600 https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014454263 Explain the case, what was it about.


    the Supreme Court struck down on First Amendment grounds a Texas flag desecration law. The 5-4 decision has served as the center point of a continuing debate regarding the value of free speech as exercised through the burning of the U.S. flag as a form of political protest.


    What did the Supreme Court say in their decision about this case


    legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5–4) on June 21, 1989, that the burning of the U.S. flag is a protected form of speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.


    What were the social implications after this court cases was decided and why is it considered a Landmark.


    La primera enmienda protege la libertad de expresión, y la corte reconoció que ésta no se limitaba a la expresión oral. La decisión se sustentaba en un hecho reconocido en la jurisprudencia, con casos como Stromberg contra California (uso de una bandera roja como expresión) y en Tinker contra Distrito Escolar de Des Moines (uso de un brazalete negro como expresión).]]>     2020-12-14 00:52:45 UTC https://padlet.com/0868600/a5o357w114gtyito/wish/1014454263