-
The Supreme Court agreed with the railroad, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause incorporated the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, meaning states could not take private property for public use without providing just compensation -
Gitlow argued that the state law violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and press, arguing that the state could not punish speech unless it presented a "clear and present dangerThe Court upheld Gitlow's conviction, but in doing so, it also recognized that the First Amendment's protections applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause -
In the landmark case Near v. Minnesota (1931), the Supreme Court ruled that government censorship of the press through prior restraint (preventing publication) violates the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech and the press. -
The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, overturned De Jonge's conviction, holding that the Oregon statute, as applied, violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.The Court emphasized that the right to peaceable assembly is a fundamental right, and that state governments cannot punish individuals for participating in lawful meetings, regardless of the group's overall goal -
The Court ruled that the state law requiring licenses for religious solicitation was an unconstitutional prior restraint on the free exercise of religion because it allowed state officials to determine what constituted a religious cause, which could lead to discrimination.
The Court also found that the Cantwells' actions did not constitute a breach of the peace, as there was no evidence of violence or incitement to violence.
Significance: -
In Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing (1947), the Supreme Court ruled that a New Jersey law reimbursing parents for school transportation costs, including to private and religious schools, did not violate the First Amendment's Establishment Claus -
The Supreme Court reversed the Michigan Supreme Court's decision, holding that the right to a public trial, guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, applies to state criminal proceeding.The Supreme Court underscored that individuals must be given notice of proceedings against them to ensure their right to defend themselves. -
The Supreme Court ruled 5-to-4 that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits state infringement of the privilege against self-incrimination, just as the Fifth Amendment prevents the federal government from denying the privilege.
Significance: -
the case addressed whether a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses is violated when the prosecution introduces evidence from a preliminary hearing where the defendant was not represented by counsel. The Supreme Court held that Texas violated Pointer's Sixth Amendment rights by admitting evidence from the preliminary hearing where he was not represented by counsel. -
The case centered on whether the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, which previously only applied to the federal government, should also apply to the states. The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents the government from using illegally obtained evidence in court, applies to state governments as we -
The Court reasoned that the law punished Robinson for being addicted, a status that is often a result of disease or illness, rather than for engaging in any criminal act. The Court stated that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment extends to the criminalization of status, not just the punishment itself. -
In a unanimous 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gideon, holding that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial and is made obligatory on the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. -
The case centered on whether the state could criminalize the peaceful expression of unpopular views and whether the protesters' First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, assembly, and petition had been violated. The Court emphasized that the students' actions were an exercise of First Amendment rights "in their most pristine and classic form" and that peaceful assembly and protest are fundamental rights protected by the Constitution. -
Cohen v. California (1971) is significant because the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protects the right to express offensive language, even in public, as long as it doesn't incite violence or fall under other unprotected speech categories. The Supreme Court reversed Cohen's conviction, holding that the First Amendment protects even offensive speech, as long as it doesn't fall under exceptions like incitement to violence or obscenit -
The Supreme Court agreed with Klopfer, holding that indefinitely postponing prosecution without justification violates the Sixth Amendment's right to a speedy trial, which is now applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. -
North Carolina is a case decided on March 13, 1967, by the United States Supreme Court that incorporated the right to a speedy trial of the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to states. The case concerned an individual's trial being indefinitely suspended in North Carolina. -
In Washington v. Texas (1967), the Supreme Court established that the Sixth Amendment's right to compulsory process, meaning the right to have witnesses in your favor, applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. The Court ruled that a Texas statute barring co-participants in the same crime from testifying for each other violated this righ -
In a 7-to-2 decision, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment guarantee of trial by jury in criminal cases was "fundamental to the American scheme of justice," and that the states were obligated under the Fourteenth Amendment to provide such trials. -
John Dalmer Benton was charged with burglary and larceny in Maryland, found not guilty of larceny but guilty of burglary, and sentenced to 10 years in prison. The Supreme Court agreed with Benton, holding that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment applies to state courts through the Fourteenth Amendment, effectively incorporating this right into state law. -
The Supreme Court affirmed the Illinois Supreme Court's decision, finding that the Illinois bail system did not violate the Constitution. The Court reasoned that the state had a rational basis for distinguishing between situations where release is on personal recognizance (no charge) and where deposits are made (charge -
The case involved a drive-in theater manager convicted under Washington's obscenity statute for showing a sexually frank movie, "Carmen Baby," which was a loose adaptation of Bizet's opera Carmen.The Supreme Court reversed the conviction, finding that the state's obscenity law made no distinction between obscene material shown in private and public. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin significantly expanded the right to counsel, ensuring that individuals facing potential jail time, even for minor offenses, have the opportunity to present a fair defense with the assistance of legal representation,The Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to any criminal prosecution. -
The core question was whether the Second Amendment right to bear arms, as affirmed in District of Columbia v. Heller (which focused on federal gun control), also applied to state and local governments.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, sided with McDonald, holding that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is a fundamental right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, and therefore enforceable against the states. -
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, sided with Timbs, holding that the Excessive Fines Clause is an incorporated protection applicable to the states under the Fourteenth Amendmen