Download
1 / 21
210 likes | 215 Views
This social studies lesson explores five important landmark court cases in American history, including Marbury v. Madison, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v. U.S., Brown v. Board of Education, and Gideon v. Wainwright.
E N D
Honors 8th Social Studies Mrs. Singer Week of 9/3/2019
Tuesday • Quiz: Causes of the American Revolution through the VA and NJ Plans • CNN 10: option 25
Wednesday/Thursday • Landmark Court Cases • CNN 10: option 4 • Continue with Court Cases • Might start the executive branch
Marbury v. Madison (1803) • In his last weeks in office, our second President, John Adams, appointed several men to be judges in D.C. The appointments were written, signed, sealed, but not mailed out. • Jefferson arrives at the White House and decides not to mail out the appointments (he wants to make his own appointments). • This upsets William Marbury (one of the men Adams had selected). Marbury files a case with the Supreme Court to force Jefferson to send out the judge appointments created by Adams.
Marbury v. Madison • But why was Marbury allowed to START his case in the Supreme Court? Because at the time, Congress had recently passed a law stating that cases could START in the Supreme Court. • The Supreme Court reviewed Marbury's cases and decided that it was unfair that Jefferson didn't mail out the appointments, but they couldn't help him because the new law created by Congress was unconstitutional. • The Constitution states what cases can move straight to the Supreme Court, and Marbury's case didn't qualify.
Marbury v. Madison • So what's the big deal? • This was the FIRST time the Judicial branch struck down a law passed by Congress. • Showed America the power that the Judicial branch actually has because it overruled the Executive branch (under Adams) and Congress.
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) • In 1890, Louisiana passes a law that says train cars must be separated by race, but both the White cars and the Black cars must be equal. (But the White cars ended up being nicer and more preferred). • The Supreme Court sided with LA because they viewed the separation of race to be a social issue, not a violation of political or civil rights. • Only 1 of the 9 Justices disagreed, stating that our "constitution is color-blind and [classless]." • The sad outcome of this decision meant many more decades of unrestrained racial discrimination and segregation.
Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) • On December 7, 1941, during WWII, Japan bombs Hawaii and the U.S. declared war on Japan. • Japan begins to take over various islands in the Pacific, inching closer to the U.S.'s west coast mainland. • The U.S. Military issues an "exclusionary order" stating thatall people living in certain areas on the west coast who were Japanese or of Japanese descent (including those who were U.S. citizens) must be detained in "internment camps" for the safety of the U.S. during WWII.
Korematsu v. U.S. • Korematsu argued that the "exclusionary order" violated his 5th amendment (he was being deprived of life, liberty, and property withoutdue process of the law). • The Supreme Court decided that as there was no way to know which Japanese/Japanese-Americans were loyal to the U.S. and who were loyal to Japan, it was OK to force all into the camps.
Korematsu v. U.S. • This ruling is important because it set precedence thatthe Supreme Court can violate people's civil rights during wartime simply because they look like the enemy. • The Japanese internment camps are now viewed as a black mark on the Supreme Court's decisions, but it is still unclear what rights individuals who happen to look like U.S. enemies have. This issue was brought up following the attacks on 9/11 regarding those U.S. citizens of Middle Eastern descent.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) • In the early 1950s, parents of Black children in the U.S. grew tired of sending their children to segregated schools (school separated by race). • A previous court case (Plessy v. Ferguson) stated that segregation was legal, so long as the schools were equal. • Some Black and White schools were equal, but in many states, Black schools were more run-down, lacked basic resources, and didn't have amenities like a cafeteria, gym, or busing.
Brown v. Board of Education • The parents of the Black students worked in conjunction with the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) to challenge the Plessy v. Ferguson ruling. • They argued that not only were the schools not equal, but that by segregating Black and White students, the underlying message is that Blacks are inferior to Whites, which violated the 14th amendment guaranteeing "equal protection of the laws." • This time the Supreme Court agreed and they banned segregation and even overturned their previous ruling on Plessy v. Ferguson.
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) • Clarence Gideon was charged with breaking into a pool hall and stealing some drinks and about $5. He couldn't afford a lawyer, and according to Florida law, lawyers were only required to be appointed by the state if the case was a death penalty case. • Gideon attempted to represent himself, but lost, and was sentenced to 5 years in prison. • While in prison, he petitioned the Supreme Court to review his case, citing that the constitution states he has the right to a lawyer in the 6th amendment.
Gideon v. Wainwright • The Supreme Court agreed with Gideon, and he received a new trial with his own lawyer. He was found not guilty. • The Supreme Court's decision in this case meant that now states had to provide lawyers to people in all cases. • One Supreme Court Justice said, "even the intelligent and educated [man] lacks both the skill and knowledge adequately to prepare his defense." Meaning that the everyday person can't possibly be expected to defend themselves in court.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) • Ernesto Miranda was arrested for a violent crime (rape) in Phoenix. He was questioned by police for 2 hours, and eventually confessed to the crime. That written confession was used against him in court, and he was convicted of the crime. • Miranda argued that the 5th amendment promised he wouldn't have to bear witness against himself, and although his confession was written voluntarily, Miranda said he wouldn't have written it if his 6th amendment right had not also been broken (Miranda was not informed of his right to an attorney or his right to remain silent).
Miranda v. Arizona • The Supreme Court agreed with Miranda. They stated "the right to remain silent" is so basic, that it's appropriate for citizens to be reminded of that prior to questioning. They went on to say that citizens also need to be informed of their right to a lawyer prior to interrogation. • Now officers must read "Miranda Rights" to suspects at the onset of their arrest. • Miranda was retried and was found guilty of his crime, even without his confession.
Miranda v. Arizona • Fun fact: Miranda served 5 years in jail for his crime and was released on parole. Four years after his release he was stabbed to death in a bar fight. Unlike Miranda, the man who murdered Miranda decided to "remain silent" when police questioned him, and lacking evidence, the police later released him.
U.S. V. Nixon (1974) • Nixon was determined to win his re-election in 1972, so much so that he decided to cheat (in a way). • He had his aides break in and place wiretaps inside his opponent's office. Nixon denied knowing about the wiretaps. • However, during the investigationit came out that there were secretly recorded conversations of Nixon discussing the wiretap plans.
U.S. v. Nixon • Nixon did everything he could to keep the tapes out of the hands of the Supreme Court, but eventually the Supreme Court came to the decision that because there was no "sensitive information" on the tapes that might jeopardize the safety of the country,Nixon MUST hand over the tapes for review. • The tapes showed thatNixon was aware of the wiretap plan on his opponent.
U.S. v. Nixon • The Court's ruling on this case is HUGE because it shows that the Executive branch does not have more power than the Judicial branch. • In many other countries, the leader of the country is immune to the judiciary process, but this case showed the U.S. and the world that in the United States, no one is above the law! • Nixon resigns the presidency
Friday • CNN10: Option "you pick" • The Executive Branch and Foreign affairs
