Landmark Supreme Court Cases: The Most Influential Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States (Facts on File Library of American History)**OUT OF PRINT**

Landmark Supreme Court Cases: The Most Influential Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States (Facts on File Library of American History)**OUT OF PRINT**

Gary R. Hartman

Language: English

Pages: 594

ISBN: 0816024529

Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub

For students of American history and political science, this encyclopedia provides concise summaries of more than 350 of the most important and influential United States Supreme Court cases. Ideal as a quick reference or starting point for further research, the book covers cases on such issues as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, civil rights, labor unions, abortion, antitrust and competition, due process, search and seizure, labor unions, executive privilege, and more. Organized alphabetically, each entry includes the case title and legal citation, year of decision, key issue, historical background, legal arguments, decision (majority and dissenting opinions), aftermath and significance, related cases, and recommended reading. Other features include a chronology of cases, an index of cases by both parties and popular titles, a subject index, a glossary of legal terms, and how to read a legal citation.

The Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks

1861: The Civil War Awakening

Unreasonable Men: Theodore Roosevelt and the Republican Rebels Who Created Progressive Politics

Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War




















Due Process, 61 Michigan Law Review 219 (1962). 8 Case Title: Bolling v. Sharpe Alternate Case Title: The District of Columbia Desegregation Case Legal Citations: 347 U.S. 497; 74 S.Ct. 693 Year of Decision: 1954 } Due Process the due process of law guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment? HISTORY OF THE CASE In BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION (1954), the Supreme Court held that the Constitution prohibits the states from maintaining racially segregated public schools. Bolling challenged the

“one charged with crime, who is unable to obtain counsel, must be furnished counsel by the state.” He contended that the ruling in this case constituted a return to old precedents that were more sound than the newly adopted ones. He said it is an obvious truth that one cannot receive a fair criminal trial without counsel. In addition, the history of the Constitution supports the need for counsel for ■ 169 those tried for crimes: “from the very beginning, our state and national constitutions

interpretation of these amendments, rendered the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which sought to equalize the advantages of citizenship among the states, ineffective in protecting individual rights against invasion by state governments. Instead, the Court looked to the due process and equal protection clauses. The plaintiffs in this case were not attacking the procedure used, but instead the actual fairness of the state-approved monopoly. Although the Court rejected

because it restrained 100 percent of the class (all males 18 to 20) for the actions of about 2 percent without any indication that the law would have a deterrence effect on that 2 percent, or on the other 98 percent. Justice Rehnquist wrote a dissenting opinion objecting to the majority opinion on two grounds: (1) the Court’s conclusion that men may invoke a more stringent standard of judicial review than pertains to most types of classifications by challenging a gender-based statute that treats

Kennedy found the law school’s administration of the admission process to constitute a quota system. Justice Scalia also dissented, joined by Justice Thomas. Justice Scalia found that the statistics proved that the law school’s admissions program sought to achieve a class racially proportionate to the pool of applicants. He found racial understanding not “uniquely relevant” to law school or public education, concluding that if universities could use racial discrimination to achieve this

Download sample