-
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
The Court incorporated the Fifth.In Chicago, Burlington Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago, The Court held that states must provide just compensation when taking private property for public use.This case established the "incorporation doctrine. The specific issue was whether the city's one-dollar payment for condemning the railroad's land constituted "just compensation". The court ruled it didn't. -
Gitlow v. New York
The Court incorporated the First. The case involved Gitlow who was convicted under New York's Criminal Anarchy Law for publishing a pamphlet advocating for a socialist revolution. The Court upheld his conviction.This decision, while upholding the state's law, also established the principle that the First Amendment's protections extend to state actions through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, according to the National Constitution Center. -
Near v. Minnesota
The Court incorporated the First.In Near v. Minnesota (1931), the Supreme Court established a significant precedent regarding freedom of the press. The case involved a Minnesota law that allowed the government to issue injunctions against publications deemed a public nuisance, essentially censoring them in advance. The court ruled that this form of prior restraint was unconstitutional, marking a landmark decision that limits government censorship of the press. -
DeJonge v. Oregon
The Court incorporated the First. The Court ruled that states cannot punish individuals for peacefully assembling and advocating for political change.Dirk De Jonge was arrested and convicted under Oregon's criminal syndicalism law for speaking at a peaceful meeting organized by the Communist Party, but the Supreme Court overturned the conviction, establishing the protection of peaceful assembly and association under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause. -
Cantwell v. Connecticut
The Court incorporated the First. The Court addressed the intersection of free speech and religious freedom, ultimately ruling that a state cannot impose broad restrictions on religious expression, even if those views are unpopular. Specifically, the Court found a Connecticut law requiring permits for religious solicitation to be unconstitutional because it allowed for excessive governmental discretion and effectively led to religious censorship. -
Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing
The Court incorporated the First. The Court ruled that a New Jersey law reimbursing parents for transportation costs to both public and private schools, including parochial schools, did not violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The Court held that the law was neutral between believers and nonbelievers and treated religious and secular schools equally. -
In re Oliver
The Court incorporated the Sixth.The Court held that the right to a public trial applies to states through the Due Process Clause. The case involved a Michigan judge who convicted a witness of contempt and sentenced him to jail without allowing him to seek counsel or prepare a defense. The Court reversed the Michigan Court's decision, emphasizing that the Sixth Amendment's right to a public trial is a fundamental right applicable in state criminal proceedings. -
Mapp v. Ohio
the U.S. Court incorporated the 4th.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 vote in favor of Mapp. The high court said evidence seized unlawfully, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts. -
Robinson v. California
The Court incorporated the Eighth.Robinson v. California is a landmark Supreme Court case from 1962 that addressed the legality of criminalizing drug addiction. The Court ruled in a 7-2 decision that a California law, which made it a crime to be a drug addict without requiring evidence of drug possession or use, was unconstitutional. -
Edwards v. South Carolina
The Court incorporated the First.
Over 200 African American students marched from a church to the South Carolina State House grounds in Columbia, SC, to protest against racial segregation.
The students were ordered to disperse by police, and when they refused, they were arrested and charged with breach of the peace. They were convicted by a magistrate court.The students appealed.The Court reversed the convictions. The Court emphasized that the protest was peaceful. -
Gideon v. Wainwright
The Court incorporated the Sixth.Gideon was accused of breaking into a pool hall and was denied a lawyer at his trial because Florida law only provided counsel for capital offenses. Gideon appealed his conviction.The Court ruled in Gideon's favor.This decision significantly impacted the criminal justice system, ensuring that all individuals, regardless of their financial status, have access to legal representation when facing criminal charges.Gideon was retried and was acquitted of the charges. -
Malloy v. Hogan
The Court incorporated the Fifth. Malloy was arrested for gambling and ordered to testify about illegal gambling in Connecticut. He refused to testify, saying it would incriminate him. The state court held him in contempt. Malloy appealed.The Court agreed. The Court moved beyond the requirement of fundamental fairness, requiring states to adhere to the same standards of due process as the federal government. -
Pointer v. Texas
The Sixth Amendment is involved.Pointer and Dillard were arrested for robbery in Texas.They were brought to trial where they were not represented by counsel.Phillips testified and Dillard cross-examined him, but Pointer did not. After this Phillips moved to another state. At Pointer's trial, they introduced Phillips' testimony from the hearing. Pointer's attorney objected and said this violated his right to confront witnesses, but the trial judge overruled. The Court sided with Pointer. -
Klopfer v. North Carolina
The Court incorporated the Sixth Amendment. The state's practice of indefinitely suspending a trial without justification was deemed a violation of this right, Klopfer's initial trial ended in a mistrial, and the state continued the case for several terms of court, which the Supreme Court found to be a violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. -
Washington v. Texas
The Court incorporated the Sixth Amendment. Jackie and Fuller were charged with the same murder. Fuller was convicted. Jackie sought to call Fuller as a witness in his trial, but Texas law prevented co-defendants from testifying for each other. Jackie argued that his testimony would have been vital to his defense, as he had allegedly committed the murder. The Court ruled unanimously in favor of Washington. The Court reversed Washington's conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. -
Ker v. California
The Court incorporated the Fourth. This was a warrantless arrest of the apartment based on suspicion of violating California's Law.Police entered and found marijuana.The Court upheld the convictions saying that the state had probable cause.This also referenced the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in court.The holding in Ker v. California says that an unannounced warrantless entry is valid is inconsistent with later rulings like Payton v. New York (1980). -
Duncan v. Louisiana
The Court incorporated the sixth amendment.Gary Duncan, a Louisiana teenager, was charged with simple battery, a misdemeanor, and denied a jury trial by a Louisiana court. Duncan argued that his Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, as incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment, had been violated. The Supreme Court sided with Duncan, holding that the right to a jury trial is a fundamental right that must be protected in state courts. -
Benton v. Maryland
The Court incorporated the Fifth
Benton was acquitted of larceny but convicted of burglary. He appealed the burglary conviction, and the state re-indicted him for both larceny and burglary, leading to a retrial where he was convicted of both. He argued that the retrial on the larceny charge after his acquittal violated the Double Jeopardy Clause.The Court agreed, ruling that the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Consequences: -
Schilb v. Kuebel
The Supreme Court incorporated the Eighth Amendment.Illinois law allowed for pretrial release through several ways, including depositing a portion of the bail amount with a retention of 1% upon completion of the bail. Schilb challenged the law, arguing the retention of the 1% deposit was an unconstitutional penalty for those acquitted and a violation of equal protection and due process. The Court upheld the Illinois law, finding it to be a reasonable administrative fee rather than a penalty. -
Rabe v. Washington
In Rabe v. Washington the Court reversed the obscenity conviction of a drive-in theater manager, Rabe, for showing the film "Carmen Baby." The court found that the state's obscenity law failed to provide "fair notice" to film exhibitors about what was prohibited.The film was deemed obscene by the state court based on its exhibition context, but the Supreme Court ruled that the state law did not incorporate context into its definition of obscenity, according to the First Amendment Encyclopedia. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin
The Supreme Court incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Argersinger was charged with carrying a concealed weapon, a misdemeanor, and tried with no lawyer. He was sentenced to 90 days in jail. Florida Court upheld his conviction, saying that the right to counsel only applied to trials for non-petty offenses. U.S. Court reversed the court's decision, emphasizing that the potential for imprisonment, regardless of the length, is a serious enough concern to require legal representation. -
McDonald v. Chicago
This case incorporated the Second Amendment. Otis McDonald challenged the city's strict handgun ban and registration requirements. They said it violated their Second Amendment rights. The question was whether the Second Amendment, which originally limited federal government power, also applied to state and local governments. The Court sided with McDonald. The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense applies to states through the Fourteenth Amendment. -
Timbs v. Indiana
This case incorporated the eighth amendment. Timbs was convicted of drug offenses and faced a $10,000 fine. However, the state sought to seize his Land Rover. The question was whether the Excessive Fines Clause applied to state governments.The Court said that the Excessive Fines Clause does apply to states. This was because the Court found that the Clause was "both 'fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty' and 'deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition' ".