325px warren court 1953

Tara Schardong The Warren Court

  • Roth v. United States, 1957

    Roth v. United States, 1957
    Roth operated a book-selling business in New York and was convicted of mailing obscene circulars and an obscene book in violation of a federal obscenity statute. Roth's case was combined with Alberts v. California, in which a California obscenity law was challenged by Alberts after his similar conviction for selling lewd and obscene books in addition to composing and publishing obscene advertisements for his products.
  • Mapp v. Ohio, 1961

    Mapp v. Ohio, 1961
    Mapp asked to see the “warrant” and took it from an officer, putting it in her dress. The officers struggled with Mapp and took the piece of paper away from her. They handcuffed her for being “belligerent.”
  • Baker vs. Carr 1962

    Baker vs. Carr 1962
    This civil action was brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988 to redress the alleged deprivation of federal constitutional rights. The complaint, alleging that by means of a 1901 statute of Tennessee apportioning the members of the General Assembly among the State's 95 counties, these plaintiffs and others similarly situated, are denied the equal protection of the laws accorded them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
  • Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963

    Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963
    Charged in a Florida State Court with a noncapital felony, petitioner appeared without funds and without counsel and asked the Court to appoint counsel for him, but this was denied on the ground that the state law permitted appointment of counsel for indigent defendants in capital cases only. Petitioner conducted his own defense about as well as could be expected of a layman.
  • Reynolds v. Sims, 1964

    Reynolds v. Sims, 1964
    In Reynolds v. Sims (1964), the Supreme Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that the legislative districts across states be equal in population. The case began in 1962, when the Supreme Court ruled that it had authority to review cases brought by individuals harmed by legislative apportionment or redistricting (see Baker v. Carr).
  • Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964

    Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964
    Petitioner was not advised by the police of his right to remain silent and, after persistent questioning by the police, made a damaging statement to an Assistant State's Attorney which was admitted at the trial. Convicted of murder, he appealed to the State Supreme Court, which affirmed the conviction.
  • Engel v. Vitale, 1965

    Engel v. Vitale, 1965
    In 1960 in Illinois, Escobedo was arrested in connection with murder. During police interrogation Escobedo requested to see his lawyer, but was denied. He made a statement which was used against him at trial and he was convicted of murder. He appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
  • Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965

    Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965
    In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court ruled that a state's ban on the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy. The case concerned a Connecticut law that criminalized the encouragement or use of birth control. The 1879 law provided that "any person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purposes of preventing conception shall be fined not less than forty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days.
  • Miranda v. Arizona, 1966

    Miranda v. Arizona, 1966
    Of all the Warren Court decisions expanding the rights of the accused, none earned more enmity over the years than Miranda v. Arizona, the 1966 ruling which required police to give a four-part warning to suspects before interrogation. Prosecutors, police, and conservative commentators predicted that the decision would be devastating to law enforcement, given that about 40% of crimes are solved through confessions.