Civil Liberties: SCOTUS Cases by Maryam Morsali Sullivan https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc en-us 2021-02-28 23:40:50 UTC 2021-10-18 16:09:20 UTC hello@padlet.com masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1252353733 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-03-01 10:22:30 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1252353733 masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806876754 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-10-11 07:14:37 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806876754 masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806877082 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-10-11 07:14:48 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806877082 masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806877628 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-10-11 07:14:54 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806877628 masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878081 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-10-11 07:15:01 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878081 masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878236 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-10-11 07:15:07 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878236 masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878387 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-10-11 07:15:12 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878387 masullivan10 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878530 Facts of the Case:
Constitutional Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning: ]]> 2021-10-11 07:15:17 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1806878530 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1811070464 Jonathan A.
Facts of the Case: 
  • The New York School Board provided - schools with a prayer that they could choose to partake in after the Saluting of the flag. 
  • Establishment clause: Prohibits the establishment of a religion by Congress
Constitutional Issue(s): Does the recitation of a prayer in public schools violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
Holding (Decision): 6-1 in favor of Engel.
Reasoning: The prayer violated the Establishment Clause because it was a religious activity composed by government officials (school administrators) and used as a part of a government program (school instruction) to advance religious beliefs


]]> 2021-10-12 15:04:16 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1811070464 yazminv84452 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1811265282 Facts of the Case:
  • The state of Wisconsin convicted three members of Old Order Amish and Mennonite communities for violating the state's compulsory education law, which requires attendance at school until the age of 16.
  •  The three parents refused to send their children to such schools after the eighth grade, arguing that high school attendance was contrary to their religious beliefs.
Constitutional Issue:
Under what conditions does the state's interest in promoting education override parents' First Amendment right to free exercise of religion?
Holding (Decision):
7–0, in favor of Yoder.
Reasoning:
The Supreme Court held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, as incorporated by the 14th Amendment, prevented the state of Wisconsin from compelling the respondents to send their children to formal secondary school beyond the age of 14. The Court ruled that the families' religious beliefs and practices outweighed the state's interests in making the children attend school beyond the eighth grade.

]]> 2021-10-12 16:00:47 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1811265282 Vansh G https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1811860849 Facts of the Case | A military analyst was not happy about the US’s involvement in the Vietnam war so he leaked classified info to newspapers.

The newspapers then published some of the info which forced the government to file a claim in a federal court to stop the papers from publishing anything further.

The first time around the courts favored the newspapers and the second time, when the government appealed, the courts favored the government, so the case was then taken to the supreme court.


Constitutional Issue(s) | Can the government violate the first amendment of the press’ freedom by citing the Espionage Act to protect classified information?


Holding (Decision) | 6-3 for the newspapers


Reasoning  | the freedom of press cannot be lessened by any law according to the constitution - the government has no control over the press-> press works for the governed

]]> 2021-10-12 19:42:22 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1811860849 kevins84505 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817561767 Facts of the Case: Jane Roe (pseudonym) sued Henry Wade, district attorney for Dallas County, Texas over the Texas abortion law, saying that it was unconstitutional.

Constitutional issue: The Texas abortion law banned abortions, which limited the freedoms of women and their right to self. Do they have the power to enact that law?

Holding: In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled this law unconstitutional. Under the 9th amendment to the constitution, women have the right to abortions. The 14th Amendment explains how it applies to each state.

Reasoning: The 9th amendment protects a woman’s right to abortion since it falls under the category of privacy, and the 14th amendment is how it applies to individual states. Women’s right to self outweighs the state’s interest or baby’s interest until the second trimester, which is when the state can begin to prohibit or ban abortions.]]> 2021-10-14 16:02:56 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817561767 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817600246 Facts of the Case | - He had printed and mailed 15,000 fliers to draft-age men arguing that conscription was unconstitutional and urging them to resist.  
- Socialist Party argued that conscription was a form of “involuntary servitude” and thereby outlawed by the 13th Amendment. 
Constitutional Issue(s) | Did Schenck’s conviction under the Espionage Act for criticizing the draft violate his First Amendment free speech rights? 
Holding (Decision) | Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes delivered the unanimous opinion for the Court in favor of the United States.
Reasoning  | the Constitution does not protect efforts to induce the criminal act of resisting the draft during a time of war.]]> 2021-10-14 16:17:06 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817600246 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817632933 Facts of the Case: The city of Chicago wanted to ban handguns in 1982 to reduce injuries and deaths caused by the weapon. Otis McDonald and other residents of Chicago decided to sue the city for violating their Constitutional rights. 

Constitutional Issue: Does the Second Amendment (the right to bear arms) apply to state and local governments because of the 14th Amendment?

Holding: 5-4 in favor of McDonald

Reasoning: Because self-defense is basic right, the citizens of Chicago should have the right to bear arms. Since the state was trying to limit and infringe on citizens' rights to firearms, this would be considered unconstitutional. This meant that they would continue to have their Second Amendment rights. ]]> 2021-10-14 16:30:03 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817632933 https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817636949 Facts of the case:
-After 1982 if anyone wanted to own a firearm they had to legally register it so that the state could limit the amount of murder and crimes 
- people felt like their 14th amendment rights were deprived
Constitutional issue: Will the new law give more power to the government by prohibiting people's individual rights from the federal gov. ?
Holding:
5-4 in favor of McDonald
Reasoning:



]]> 2021-10-14 16:31:40 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1817636949 Estrella https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1824614998 Facts of the Case: 
- In 1969, an unmarried and pregnant resident of Texas known as Jane Roe wanted to terminate her pregnancy
- Texas law made it a felony to abort a fetus unless “on medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother.” Roe and her attorneys filed a lawsuit on behalf of her and all other women who were or might become pregnant and seek abortions. 
- The lawsuit was filed against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas, and claimed that the state law violated the U.S. Constitution
- In particular, the district court concluded that “[t]he fundamental right of single women and married persons to choose whether to have children is protected by the Ninth Amendment,” which applies to the states through the 14th Amendment

Constitutional Issue: 
Does the U.S. Constitution protect the right of a woman to obtain an abortion?

Holding: 
- 7–2 decision 
- The U.S. Supreme Court decided in Roe’s favor

Reasoning:  
- a woman had the right to decide whether to have an abortion in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment
- the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy
- a woman’s right to privacy surrounding the choice to have an abortion outweighs a state’s interests in regulating this decision. During this stage, having an abortion does not pose a grave danger to the mother’s life and health, and the fetus is still undeveloped. The state’s interests are not yet compelling, so it cannot regulate or prohibit her from having an abortion
]]> 2021-10-18 16:09:20 UTC https://padlet.com/masullivan10/kqrb168uq4va0chc/wish/1824614998