Edwards v. South Carolina 1963 by Elizabeth Culler https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0 en-us 2020-11-16 15:20:04 UTC 2020-11-18 17:27:34 UTC hello@padlet.com Chief Justice and Associates Justices eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/928192867 The Chief Justice of this case was Earl Warren.

The associates justices were Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, Tom C. Clark, John M. Harlan II, William J Brennan Jr, Potter Stewart Byron White, and Arthur Goldberg. 

The member of the associates justices that dissented from the majority was Tom C. Clark. All others, including Chief Justice Earl Warren, were in the majority.]]> 2020-11-16 17:14:16 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/928192867 Background Information eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/928233802 On March 2, 1961, 187 African American petitioners assembled at Zion Baptist Church in Columbia, South Carolina. In groups of 15 people, these protesters peacefully marched to the South Carolina Sate House in order to express their dislike for the disregard of African American Civil Rights. Although there was no violence enacted, police told the protesters that they must disperse within the next 15 minutes or be arrested. As the protesters refused to disperse, they were all faced with the conviction of committing a breach of the peace.]]> 2020-11-16 17:21:40 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/928233802 Lower Court eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937164752 The lower court this case originated from was the Richland County Court. This court ruled that the protesters were disturbing the peace of the community, and the police officers acted accordingly. The Richland County Court decided that the police were "reasonable and motivated solely by a proper concern for the preservation of order and prevention of further interference with traffic upon the public streets and sidewalks"(Edwards v South Carolina).]]> 2020-11-18 15:27:52 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937164752 Oral Arguments eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937638596 James Edwards, the petitioner, brought this case to the court because he believed that the first amendment rights of the protesters had been disregarded. He believed that the African American people had the right to peaceful expression, assembly, and petition.

The advocate for the respondent, Daniel R. McLeod countered with the claim that the the peace of the people was interrupted, as the protest resulted in a backup of traffic.]]> 2020-11-18 16:49:38 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937638596 Question the Supreme Court was attempting to answer eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937670945 Did the arrests and convictions of the marchers violate their freedom of speech, assembly, and petition for redress of their grievances as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?

The court ruled that the arrest of these protesters was an effort to "make criminal the peaceful expression of unpopular views"(Edwards v South Carolina). The court determined that the exact definition of the breach of peace could not be used to justify these arrests.]]> 2020-11-18 16:55:24 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937670945 Majority Opinion eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937721959 The author of the majority opinion was Potter Stuart. The Court Majority was to overturn the initial ruling and acquit those convicted. This was decided based on the evidence of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which claimed that the Free Petition Clause was able to expand to states in addition to the federal government.]]> 2020-11-18 17:04:33 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937721959 Dissenting Opinion eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937764822 The dissenting opinion of Tom C. Clark claimed that Edwards posed a threat to violence, as he involved nearly 200 protesters and 300 onlookers. He used the prior court case of Feiner v New York to back this up, in which this court case ruled that the crowd of only 80 protesters were enough to inflict violence.]]> 2020-11-18 17:12:07 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937764822 Significance eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937790392 While this Court Case did not overturn any previous rulings or question the Constitutionality of other judgments, it was largely significant because of the prevalence of racism. These African Americans were already protesting for the achievement of civil rights, and the disregard of it was ironically exemplified with their arrest. The overturning of the convictions of these African Americans in the Supreme Court exemplified an aim to end racism and unfair treatment of African Americans.]]> 2020-11-18 17:16:30 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937790392 Judicial Activism or Restraint? eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937812433 In my opinion, this Court Case exemplifies Judicial Activism, as a previously ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court.]]> 2020-11-18 17:20:30 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937812433 eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937834945 2020-11-18 17:24:29 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937834945 eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937844007 2020-11-18 17:26:11 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937844007 eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937847385 2020-11-18 17:26:49 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937847385 eculle4105 https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937850218 2020-11-18 17:27:20 UTC https://padlet.com/eculle4105/z0gny25p73jfabb0/wish/937850218