Bill of Rights Padlet by Eduardo Sandoval

Tinker v. Des Moines (1st)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-10 01:28:14 UTC

In the Tinker v. Des Moines Supreme Court case, a group of students wore black arm bands in protest for peace during the Vietnam war. The Des Moines School District wasn't fond of this and suspended the students for "disruptive reasons". This violated the students 1st Amendment the right to express.

1st Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-10 01:33:23 UTC

The 1st Amendment provides protection to several rights; to express ideas through speech, press, assembly, and protest. This also protects freedom of religion and practice.

2nd Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-11 15:34:09 UTC

The 2nd Amendment provides the protection to keep and bear arms.

McDonald v. City of Chicago (2nd)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-11 15:51:13 UTC

In the McDonald v. Chicago Supreme Court case, McDonald sued the city of Chicago ban laws because it violated his right to bear arms. The Supreme Court was in favor of McDonald because the ban laws prevented him of self-defense.

3rd Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-11 15:59:23 UTC

The 3rd Amendment prevents soldiers from quartering or invading individuals homes. This Amendment was effective during the American Revolution.

Griswold v. Connecticut (3rd)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 06:31:13 UTC

In the Griswold v. Connecticut Supreme Court case, Connecticut restricted married couples from using contraceptives. Despite not using the 3rd Amendment as a basis, it was relative to this because the government's restriction on contraceptives fell within "zone of privacy".

4th Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 06:33:30 UTC

The 4th Amendment prevents the government from conducting an unreasonable search and seizure of an individual or their private property. This Amendment is related to warrants and how officers are unable to conduct a search without one.

Mapp v. Ohio (4th)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 06:53:35 UTC

In the Mapp v. Ohio Supreme Court case, Mapp was convicted of possessing obscene pictures that were found during an illegal police search. The Supreme Court concluded that the evidence found during the police search could not be used to prosecute Mapp as it violated her rights of irrational search and seizure. This case affected how evidence is searched and conducted.

5th Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 06:59:15 UTC

The 5th Amendment provides a variety of rights. Serious criminal charges must begin with a grand jury, a person could not experience a double jeopardy or have property taken awake from the government without just compensation. People have the right against self-incrimination and have the right of due process of law.

Pennsylvania v. Muniz (5th)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 14:16:38 UTC

In the Pennsylvania v. Muniz Supreme Court case, after being pulled over, Muniz was asked to perform three sobriety tests and was arrested for failing them. After arriving at the station, the officer failed to address his Miranda rights and questioned and videotaped his answers to use in court to prosecute him. This violated his rights against self-incrimination and fortified the Miranda Rights.

6th Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 15:15:03 UTC

The 6th Amendment provides protections to people accused of crimes. Such as the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury or judge (impartial meaning non-biased individuals).

Batson v. Kentucky (6th)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 15:18:22 UTC

In the Batson v. Kentucky Supreme Court case, Batson was charged and trialed with second-degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the case, the prosecutor used his peremptory strategies to racially strike 4 black jurors to leave the venire, leaving a jury composed of a white jurors. This violated Batson's 6th Amendment rights to an impartial jury.

7th Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-17 15:36:07 UTC

The 7th Amendment gives the right of Federal civil cases to a jury trial. This right ensures that citizens' civil cases can be heard and decided upon by a jury of their peers.

Apodaca v. Oregon (7th)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-18 14:55:54 UTC

In the Apodaca v. Oregon Supreme Court case, Apodaca and two other defendants that were convicted of three different accounts. All of which we plead guilty by three different juries by close unanimous decision. Apodaca claimed that this violated his 7th Amendment rights because it supposedly didn't give him a thorough jury trial. However, the Supreme Court was in favor in Oregon and does not require juries return unanimous decisions in order to convict.

8th Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-18 15:05:02 UTC

The 8th Amendment bars excessive fines and/or unusual cruel punishment. For example, a person who stole a candy bar could not receive the death penalty.

Graham v. Florida (8th)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-18 15:16:39 UTC

In the Graham v. Florida Supreme Court case, 16-year-old Terrence Graham was convicted by Florida state court for armed home robbery and sentenced to life in prison without parole. The Supreme Court held that the 8th Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause does not permit a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in prison without parole for a non-homicidal crime

9th Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-18 18:37:56 UTC

The 9th Amendment states rights of citizens will be protected whether certain rights are listed in the Constitution. It also leaves rights that are not listed in the Constitution as an opportunity for interpretation. For example the right to privacy.

Roe v. Wade (9th)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-18 18:57:26 UTC

In Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case, Jane Roe (a name used when a person doesn't want to share their legal name) filed a lawsuit against Henry Wade in regards of abortion being illegal. She exclaimed that this violated her rights to privacy and other Amendment rights that aren't listed in the Constitution but are still protected. The Supreme Court stated that a woman's choice to have an abortion is her right to privacy.

10th Amendment

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-18 19:02:20 UTC

The 10th Amendment states that the Federal Government only has powers that were delegated to them in the Constitution. Powers that are not listed in the Constitution were delegated to the states.

State of Missouri v. Holland (10th)

eduardo_sandoval48 — 2024-01-18 19:16:20 UTC

In the State of Missouri v. Holland, Congress implemented the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in 1918 in order to enforce the treaty between U.S. and Great Britain The State of Missouri argued that the Constitution gave no enumerated to regulate bird migratory bird hunting. However, the Supreme Court favored Holland because the act enforced the treaty between both countries, highlighting the Supremacy Clause and how treaties have a superior holding over state interests.