Supreme court inc. title

Supreme Court Cases for the Process of Incorporation (14th Amendment)

  • Period: to

    14th Amendment Incorporation.

    The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868, and it fluctuated the perceptions of the Judicial System's interpretation. The 14th Amendment has held the Bill of Rights as a shield, not only to Federal but to State courts as well.
  • Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago

    Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
    The city of Chicago wanted to build a disjoint section on Rockwell Street, and this section included private property. The property was owned by individuals and the Quincy Railroad Company. The city condemned private property while awarding compensation. The railroad company appealed to the SCOTUS by claiming that their 14th and 5th Amendment with due process under a state statute. The SCOTUS held that the City of Chicago was justified as compensation was required for due process.
  • Gitlow v. New York

    Gitlow v. New York
    Gitlow, a socialist, published a "Left-Wing Manifesto" that advocated strikes and class action. The appellate division and most prestigious court in New York affirmed that the manifesto elaborated on the seditious speech of government coup. Gitway argued that no traction was gained from his manifesto publically, so the concrete basis of sedition was null. The SCOTUS ruled that the First Amendment did not protect any speech that meant malicious intent towards the government and National Security.
  • Near v. Minnesota

    Near v. Minnesota
    A Minneapolis newspaper, The Saturday Press, exclaimed how local officials communed with gangsters. The Minneapolis Supreme Court explained that the newspaper violated the "gag law", and the newspaper was indicted. The newspaper could not post malicious and profound things not yet proven. The press appealed to the SCOTUS, and they agreed that the state law violated the 1st Amendment's piece of freedom of the press. The 14th Amendment was violated as states must follow the Bill of Rights.
  • DeJogne v. Oregon

    DeJogne v. Oregon
    In Portland, Dirk De Jonge held a meeting with a Communist Party. Police raided the conference, and De Jonge was arrested. He was arrested on the account of criminal syndicalism, but the State Supreme Court expelled the original arrest by proclaiming that he was violating the law with teachings of criminal syndicalism. De Jonge appealed to the Supreme Court by saying evidence was sufficient, and due process and the Fourteenth Amendment were violated. Supreme Court ruled in favor of De Jonge.
  • Cantwell v. Connecticut

    Cantwell v. Connecticut
    Cantwell and his sons, all three Jehovah's Witnesses, were trying to convert some people in a predominantly Catholic neighborhood. Two pedestrians acted angrily, and the individuals were arrested for inciting a law breach amidst peace and violation of state statute to require a certificate for solicitor's validation of public funding. The SCOTUS ruled that Cantwell was protected by the 1st (freedom of religion) and 14th Amendment; the 14th secured liberties above the state statute presented.
  • Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing

    Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing
    A New Jersey Law prompted reimbursement on school transportation which went to some private Catholic Schools. Arch R. Everson, a taxpayer, proclaimed that this notion violated the New Jersey State Constitution and First Amendment, i.e. the separation of church and state. The SCOTUS ruled in favor of New Jersey, proclaiming that the reimbursement allowed for all schools, disregarding religion, to afford transportation.
  • Malloy v. Hogan

    Malloy v. Hogan
    William Malloy was arrested for a gambling raid and was charged with a year in jail and a 500$ fine. The sentence was suspended soon after, and Malloy was placed for two years on probation. A state court ordered Malloy to testify against and gambling, and he refused due to self-incrimination and the 6th Amendment. Malloy appealed to the SCOTUS, and the Supreme Court agreed that his 6th Amendment was violated and that the state's order was null due to the 14th Amendment. Malloy won his case.
  • Mapp v. Ohio

    Mapp v. Ohio
    Dollree Mapp was investigated for harboring a fugitive in her home, and obscene materials were discovered at her house. Police didn't get a warrant for infiltrating her residence, and Mapp appealed to her First Amendment for the obscene materials. The SCOTUS disregarded the First Amendment plea and. instead, addressed the violation of the Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment since state police broke the Fourth.
  • Robinson v. California

    Robinson v. California
    A jury found a narcotic addict guilty. The defendant claimed he had a mental illness and appealed to the SCOTUS. The SCOTUS agreed that he could not be charged on the 8th Amendment of cruel and unusual punishment because of his illness, and the state statute that reprimanded the defendant was nullified because of the 14th Amendment.
  • Edwards v. South Carolina

    Edwards v. South Carolina
    187 Students were arrested for breaching the peace after protesting peacefully against the South Carolina government. The state's judicial system affirmed the convictions, but the students claimed that no evidence of malicious intent or exhibition was apparent. They claimed the 6th Amendment was violated. The SCOTUS ruled that the state violated the student's 6th Amendment and that the 14th Amendment overturned the North Carolina statute.
  • Gideon v. Wainright

    Gideon v. Wainright
    Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with burglary in Florida state. The court ruled Gideon guilty as no lawyer was provided in a capital case. Gideon filed that his 6th Amendment had been violated because of no proper representation, i.e. a lawyer. Florida state denied this. Gideon appealed to the SCOTUS, and they agreed that Gideon's 6th Amendment and 14th Amendment had been violated. Gideon needed to be represented under the 6th Amendment, even under the state courts due to the 14th Amendment.
  • Ker v. California

    Ker v. California
    Diane Ker and George Douglas were convicted of Marijuana possession, but the Police report never assured that the meeting between Ker and a third party included drugs due to superficial lights. Police raided Ker's apartment with no warrant, and Ker appealed to the Supreme Court after the indictment. The Supreme Court ruled that a whim wasn't enough for arrest, and no warrant from state police obstructed the 14th Amendment and 4th Amendment.
  • Pointer v. Texas

    Pointer v. Texas
    Bob Granville Pointer was arrested under the allegation of stealing from a 7/11 along with Lloyd Dillard. The state offered a transcript of a preliminary hearing that addressed Pointer's notion for leaving Texas altogether. The defense argued that the notion violated Pointer's denial to confront an alleged in counsel. The judge overruled this, and the case was taken to the Supreme Court. The SCOTUS found that the transcript violated Pointer's right to confront, Dillard, an alleged in counsel.
  • Duncan v. Louisiana

    Duncan v. Louisiana
    Gary Duncan, a black teenager, was convicted of assaulting a white youth by slapping his elbow. He was given 60 days of prison and a 150$ fine. Duncan was presented with no jury. Duncan appealed to the SCOTUS, and they deemed that Lousiana should've provided him a lawyer due to the 6th Amendment, and that the 14th Amendment validated such a clause at the state level.
  • Miranada v. Arizona

    Miranada v. Arizona
    Ernesto Miranda was brought in for police questioning on whether he had been affiliated with rape and murder. The police neglected to mention his right to a lawyer, and he was also forced to self-incriminate himself. The police got a written confession, and he was found guilty. Miranda appealed to the SCOTUS, and they agreed that his 5th amendment rights been violated along with no assessment of the right for a lawyer. SCOTUS agreed that his 5th Amendment has been violated at the state level.
  • Klopfer v. North Carolina

    Klopfer v. North Carolina
    Peter Klopfler was charged with criminal trespass when he protested on the ground of a restaurant. The state jury could not reach a decision, and Klopfler's case was left for leave. Klopfler exclaimed that this violated his 6th Amendment, right to a speedy trial, and he appealed to the Supreme Court. The SCOTUS agreed on his behalf that Klopfler deserved his trial reopened for defense and prosecution.
  • Washington v. Texas

    Washington v. Texas
    Jackie Washington was convicted for murder via shooting. Washington asked Charles Fuller, someone, already convicted with the same murder, to testify the facts that Washington was innocent. The prosecution claimed state statute that a convict couldn't testify on another's behalf. Washington argued that notion violated his 6th Amendment to obtain a witness in his favor for the compulsory process. The SCOTUS agreed that the 6th protects that right and that a state statute is null due to the 14th.
  • Benton v. Maryland

    Benton v. Maryland
    Benton was convicted of burglary and larceny, and a grand jury acquitted him of larceny, not burglary though. His case was remanded, and a second grand jury convicted him of larceny. Benton argued that the 6th protected him from the same crime, and the second jury violated that. The SCOTUS reaffirmed that Benton was right, and the 6th and 14th held strong, overturning the state decision and apparent violation of the 6th.
  • Schilb v. Kuebel

    Schilb v. Kuebel
    Schilb is fined for a certain amount of money, and the court keeps 10% of that money. Schilb was found innocent, but the court only refunded one percent, and Schilb found this to be cruel and unconstitutional. Schilb appealed to the SCOTUS, and they agreed with him that the state must refund him more than 1%.
  • Rabe v. Washington

    Rabe v. Washington
    William Rabe was arrested for showing an obscene movie at a drive-in theatre under the state anti-obscenity law. Rabe appealed to the Supreme Court that his 1st Amendment was violated at the state level and that violated the 14th as well. The SCOTUS concurred that the state didn't give "fair notice" to Rabe, and he was justified as long as written consent for adults was applied.
  • Argersinger v. Hamlin

    Argersinger v. Hamlin
    Joe Argersinger was charged with a misdemeanor of carrying a concealed weapon. The maximum penalty for his crime was 1,000$ payment and six months of jail time. Argersinger was not represented by an attorney and was reprimanded with 90 days in jail. He appealed to the Supreme Court, and the question was asked: Do the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments apply to misdemeanors. The court ruled that the amendments guaranteed an attorney at the state level to a misdemeanor.
  • In re Oliver (Oliver v. United States)

    In re Oliver (Oliver v. United States)
    Ray E. Oliver was convicted of growing marijuana, and police searched his land even with a "no-trespass" sign on his gate. Richard Thorton was also charged with the same thing. These court cases were held under the open field doctrine. The SCOTUS agreed that even though the private property was entered, it was nullified due to the open field doctrine. The fields were already open and thus not counted as private property in the first place actually.
  • McDonald v. Chicago

    McDonald v. Chicago
    Several lawsuits in Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois all addressed the decision of the District of Columbia v. Heller case. Plaintiffs argued that the 2nd Amendment should apply to the states because of the 14th Amendment. Plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court. The SCOTUS agreed that the 14th Amendment garnered the 2nd Amendment to the state level, and the plaintiffs won the case.
  • Timbs v. Indiana

    Timbs v. Indiana
    Tyson Timbs purchased a Land Rover for 42,000$ from his father's life insurance and transported heroin across Indiana. He was arrested and charged with 1200$ and six years of jail. The court of Indiana sought to take his Land Rover, but Timb's defense argued that the felony allowed up to 10,000$ in reparations, and the Land Rover was 42,000$. This violated the Timbs 8th Amendment and 14th Amendment. The court concurred with this notion that the Land Rover inquisition violated the 8th and 14th