-
Emancipation Proclamation
Signed by Abraham Lincoln, the document freed slavery within the borders of the Southern states who had seceded from the Union, excluding those states who were already under Northern control. Former slaves were also enjoined to enlist in the Union forces. -
Yick Wo v. Hopkins
The Supreme Court rules that racial discriminatory enforcement of the law violates the equal protections clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/118/356/ -
Gideon v. Wainwright
The Supreme Court rules that under the Sixth Amendment states are required to provide legal representation to those accused of a crime but cannot afford an attorney. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/372/335/ -
Swain v. Alabama
The Supreme Court holds that a defendant only could claim racial discrimination under equal protections if they could prove that the prosecution struck racial minority jurors in every case, regardless of the crime being prosecuted or the races of the victim or the defendant. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/202/ -
Terry v. Ohio
Supreme Court rules that if an office observes a person acting unusually in such a way as to warrant reasonable suspicion of criminal activity AND may be dangerous to the office or others, the officer may conduct a limited search for weapons that could be used against them. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/1/ -
Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970
In addition to creating the DEA, this congressional act, allows the government to seize cash, cars, real estate, or other property suspected of being connected to criminal activity, even if the owner is never arrested for a crime. Termed "civil asset forfeiture, this practice reverses this basic principal of presumed innocence by presuming guilt and placing the responsibility on owners to prove the innocence of the property. Context:
https://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/asset-forfeiture-reform -
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
While ruling that it was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment for the police to stop a vehicle based solely on the basis of the driver appearing "Mexican," the Court also ruled that race could be used as a factor in determining which cars to stop and search, stating "the likelihood that any person of Mexican ancestry is an alien is high enough to make Mexican appearance a relevant factor." Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/422/873/ -
Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984
This congressional act further stipulated that assets seized by civil forfeiture can be retained and used by law enforcement agencies, with local police agencies being able to retain up to 80% of the assets' value. -
Batson v. Kentucky
The Supreme Court holds that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits prosecutors from discriminating in jury selection based on the potential juror's race, reversing course from the earlier Swain v. Alabama decision. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/476/79/ -
Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986
This congressional act established mandatory minimum sentences for minor drug offenses. Context:
https://www.cjpf.org/mandatory-minimums#:~:text=The%20Anti%2DDrug%20Abuse%20Act%20of%201986%20also%20required%20a,of%20marijuana%2C%20and%20other%20drugs%20( -
McCleskey v. Kemp
The Supreme Court rules that racial bias in sentencing--even in reference to credible statistical data demonstrating racial discrimination--cannot be challenged under the Fourteenth Amendment unless there is evidence of clear discriminatory intent. McK. would have to prove that either the prosecutor or jury sought and imposed his sentencing because of racial bias even in the face of statistical evidence of racial discrimination. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/481/279/ -
California v. Acedevo
The Supreme Court rules that police may search a a vehicle or a container within it if they have probable cause to believe that contraband or evidence is within them. This overturned earlier cases (United States v. Chadwick-1977, Arkansas v. Sanders-1979) that if the police only had probable cause to search a container in the vehicle, the police first had to obtain a warrant before searching the container. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/500/565/ -
Florida v. Bostick
The Supreme Court overturns a Florida Supreme Court Rule that all consensual search and seizures of passengers on buses were considered always to be unreasonable. Police did not have a reasonable suspicion that Bostick had drugs in their bus sweep; the issue, though, was that while Bostick did not feel the search was voluntary (because it was searched through intimidation), a "reasonable" citizen could have chosen to stop the search. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/501/429/ -
Harmelin v. Michigan
The Supreme Court upholds a life sentence of imprisonment without the possibility of parole for the possession of 672 grams of cocaine, despite the fact that the defendant had no priors. The life term was declared not in violation against the Eight Amendment against "cruel and unusual" punishment and proportionate to the crime. -
Purkett v. Elem
The Supreme Court rules that any race-neutral reason--regardless of how "silly or superstitious"--is enough to satisfy the prosecutor's burden of proof they they do no discriminate on the basis of race in jury selection. This ruling essentially nullifies Batson v. Kentucky. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/514/765/ -
United States v. Armstrong
The Supreme Court rules that in order to request discovery from the prosecution's files of selective bias in enforcement of the law, the defendants must produce solid evidence of selective bias in other races. This decision in effect nullifies Yick Wo v. Hopkins Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/517/456/ -
Whren v. United States
The Supreme Court holds that police officers are free to use minor traffic violations as a justification to stop motorists for drug investigations, without any evidence that drug activity is present (called a "pretextual stop"). The S.C. also held racial bias is irrelevant as to whether or not a search is reasonable, in effect barring defendants arguing racial bias under the Fourth Amendment. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/517/806/ -
Ohio v. Robinette
The Supreme Court rules that the police are not required to inform motorists at the end of a traffic stop that they are free to go (Fourth Amendment) before seeking permission to a search of their vehicle. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/519/33/ -
Atwater v. City of Lago Vista
The Supreme Court rules that one's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated if a motorist is arrested for minor traffic violations, such as driving without a seat belt; an arrest for a misdemeanor punishable only by a fine does not constitute an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/532/318/ -
Lockyer v. Andrade
The Supreme Court rules in favor of a California three-strikes law that mandated a 50-year sentence for a man who stole children's video tapes from a local K-Mart, his third offense. Context:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/538/63/ -
Illinois v. Caballes
The Supreme Court rules that the Fourth Amendment is not violated--does not unreasonably prolong--when in the "seizure" of a vehicle (i.e. traffic stop) a drug-sniffing dog is used. In other words, during a routine traffic stop for a minor traffic violation (running a red light), the use of a drug-sniffing on the vehicle does not constitute a "search" but is embedded within normal routines of the stop. Context:
https://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/2003/91547.html
