JUDICIAL 2
Terms
undefined, object
copy deck
- history of miranda
- Ernesto Miranda was arrested as a suspect in a kidnapping and rape case. For two hours, police officers questioned Miranda about the attack. He was not told that a suspect has the right to remain silent when being questioned. He was not allowed to call a lawyer. In time, Ernesto Miranda confessed to the crimes and signed a statement that described the details of the attack. 1966
- miranda question presented
- Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection against self-incrimination violate the 6th and 5th Amendment?
- court ruling
- couldnt be used against him
- future impact
- have right to remain silent: miranda rights
- gideon
-
• 1963
ß History- A man named Gideon was charged in a Florida state court. He was charged with a felony of breaking and entering. He had little money so didn’t hire a lawyer. “The right to legal counsel did not apply to state criminal charges.â€
• Question Presented- (UNCONSITTUTIONAL) did the courts failure to appoint counsel for Gideon violate his right to a fair trial and due process of law as protected by the 16th and 14th amendments?
ß Courts Ruling- unanimous opinion; the court said that he had a right to an attorney. “The 6th amendment’s guarantee of counsel. Due process of the law.
ß Future Impact- all criminals have the right to a fair trial and may have an attorney. Extended the 14th amendment’s due process rule to all individuals accused of serious crimes. Whether on federal or states charges. Expanded the power of the 14th amendment to protect individual rights against abuses by both the federal and state officials. - griswold
-
Griswold v. Connecticut
ß 1965
ß History- Griswold was an Executive Director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut. She would give information and instruction about medical advice to married couples concerning birth control. Was convicted under a Connecticut law, which criminalized the provision of their counseling, and other medical treatment.
ß Question Presented- Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple's ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives?
ß Courts Ruling- the Constitution does not protect a general right of privacy; the various guarantees within the Bill of Rights do. The 1st, 3rd, 4th, 9th Amendments create a new constitutional right, the right of privacy in couple relationships.
ß Future Impact- people have privacy when it comes to marriage and counseling. The 4th amendment is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, and papers. This is will go into effect with the marriage counseling because it gives privacy in their home and lives. - roe
-
Roe v. Wade
ß 1973
ß History- Jane Roe, A Texas resident wanted to get an abortion. Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant woman's life. Roe was unable to obtain a legal abortion in Texas. She eventually opted to have the child, and gave it up for adoption. After granting certiorari, the Court heard 2 arguments. The first time, Roe's attorney was Sarah Weddington and she could not locate the constitutional hook of her argument for Justice Potter Stewart. Weddington sharpened her constitutional argument in the second round.
ß Question Presented- Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?
ß Courts Ruling- woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment. The decision gave a woman total authority over the pregnancy.
ß Future Impact- The future impact is the laws of 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling. Now women have privacy and are protected by the 4th so that women can decide. - dred scott
-
Dred Scott
ß History- Dred Scott was a slave for Dr. John Emerson. When Dred Scott was in Wisconsin he was legally free. Emerson died in 1846. Scott sued for his freedom. (Claming he was because he was living in Missouri) His court case went to the US court.
ß Future Impact- African Americans now have citizenship
ß Amendments- 14th - brown
-
ß History- Linda Brown was not allowed to attend a white school. Thurgood Marshall (an attorney for NAACP) represented her family to try to get her in that school. (case started in 1953) Marshall argued the 14th amendment (segregated schools were not equal and discriminated against people of color
ß Future Impact- The Supreme Court overruled the Plessy v. Ferguson decision, stating that segregated schools were unconstitutional because they “are inherently (by nature) unequal.â€
ß Amendments- 14th - plessy
-
Plessy v. Ferguson
ß History- In 1833, the Supreme Court ruled that the bill of rights limited the federal government but not the state governments. This ruling was interpreted to mean that states were able to keep African Americans to becoming states citizens. If African Americans were not citizens, then they were not protected by the bill of rights
ß (Jim Crow Laws)
ß Future Impact- The Supreme Court ruled that segregation was not unconstitutional as long as “separate but equal†facilities or services were provided to African Americans.
ß Amendments- 13th 14th 15th