-
The City of Chicago wanted to connect two disjoint sections of Rockwell Street between 18th and 19th Streets, over private property. This property was owned by various individuals but also included a right-of-way owned by the Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Corporation. To accomplish this, the city petitioned in Cook County Circuit Court to have the necessary land condemned. The land was condemned. The individuals were awarded compensation, while the railroad was awarded just one dollar -
Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution had extended the First Amendment's provisions protecting freedom of speech and freedom of the press to apply to the governments of U.S. states. -
Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697, was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court under which prior restraint on publication was found to violate freedom of the press as protected under the First Amendment. This principle was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. -
De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause applies freedom of assembly against the states. -
Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, is a landmark court decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment's federal protection of religious free exercise incorporates via the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and so applies to state governments too. -
Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that applied the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to state law. -
In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the right of due process in state court proceedings. -
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents prosecutors from using evidence in court that was obtained illegally. -
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime. -
Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229, was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution forbade state government officials to force a crowd to disperse when they are otherwise legally marching in front of a state house. -
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires U.S. states to provide attorneys to criminal defendants who are unable to afford their own. -
Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23, was a case before the United States Supreme Court, which incorporated the Fourth Amendment's protections against illegal search and seizure. The case was decided on June 10, 1963, by a vote of 5–4. -
Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1, was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States deemed defendants' Fifth Amendment privilege not to be compelled to be witnesses against themselves was applicable within state courts as well as federal courts, overruling the decision in Twining v. New Jersey. -
Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the right of to confront accusers in state court proceedings.
-
In a 5-4 Supreme Court decision Miranda v. Arizona (1966) ruled that an arrested individual is entitled to rights against self-discrimination and to an attorney under the 5th and 6th Amendments of the United States Constitution. -
Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of the Speedy Trial Clause of the United States Constitution in state court proceedings. -
Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14, is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution is applicable in state courts as well as federal courts. -
Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, was a significant United States Supreme Court decision which incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial and applied it to the states. -
Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784, is a Supreme Court of the United States decision concerning double jeopardy. Benton ruled that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment applies to the states. In doing so, Benton expressly overruled Palko v. Connecticut. -
Kuebel is a case decided on December 20, 1971, by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Illinois bail system did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The case concerned the constitutionality of an Illinois bail statute. -
Rabe v. Washington, 405 U.S. 313, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of obscenity laws and criminal procedure to the states. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, is a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the accused cannot be subjected to actual imprisonment unless provided with counsel. Gideon v. Wainwright made the right to counsel provided in the Sixth Amendment applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. -
The McDonald v. City of Chicago case aimed to expand the interpretation of the Second Amendment from District of Columbia v. Heller to render laws passed by states and local governments that ban the possession of firearms unconstitutional -
Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U.S. was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court dealt with the applicability of the excessive fines clause of the Constitution's Eighth Amendment to state and local governments in the context of asset forfeiture.
