Dred Scott v. Sandford

Dred Scott v. Sandford Dred Scott was a Missouri slave. He was sold to Army surgeon John Emerson in Saint Louis around 1833, Scott was taken to Illinois, a free State, and on to the free Wisconsin Territory before returning to Missouri

Dred Scott v. Sandford Did a slave become free upon entering a free State? Could a slave or a black person actually be entitled to sue in federal courts? Could an item of property (a slave) be taken from the owner without just compensation?

Dred Scott v. Sandford For Dred Scott: When a person enters a free State or territory, the free status overrides the previous condition of servitude. Since slavery was forbidden in the free States and territories by federal and State laws, Dred Scott became free when he entered Illinois and Wisconsin

Dred Scott v. Sandford For Sandford: To deprive a person of property (in this case, Dred Scott) without due process or just compensation violated the 5th Amendment, which states that No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Dred Scott was still a slave and no master's property rights could be limited or taken away by a State or federal law.

Dred Scott v. Sandford The Court decided 7-2 in favor of the slave owner. Every justice submitted an individual opinion justifying his position, with Chief Justice Taney's being the most influential.

Dred Scott v. Sandford According to Taney, African Americans, be they slave or free, were not citizens. As a slave, moreover, Scott was property and had no right to bring suit in federal courts.

Plessey v. Ferguson

Plessy v. Ferguson

Plessy v. Ferguson The state of Louisiana enacted a law that required separate railway cars for blacks and whites. In 1892, Homer Adolph Plessy--who was seven-eighths Caucasian--took a seat in a "whites only" car of a Louisiana train. He refused to move to the car reserved for blacks and was arrested.

Plessy v. Ferguson Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Plessy v. Ferguson Plessy argued that asserting that segregation stigmatized blacks and stamped them with a badge of inferiority in violation of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth amendments

Plessy v. Ferguson By a 7-1 vote, the Court said that a state law that implies merely a legal distinction between the two races did not conflict with the 13th Amendment forbidding involuntary servitude

Plessy v. Ferguson The justices based their decision on the separate-but-equal doctrine, that separate facilities for blacks and whites satisfied the Fourteenth Amendment so long as they were equal.

Plessy v. Ferguson Dissenting Opinion The white race deems itself to be the dominant race, but the Constitution recognizes no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. Harlan continued: Our Constitution is colorblind. In respect of civil rights all citizens are equal before the law.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas The students represented in Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka. (L to R: Vicki Henderson, Donald Henderson, Linda Brown, James Emanuel, Nancy Todd, and Katherine Carper)

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas NAACP lawyers brought class action lawsuits on behalf of black schoolchildren and their families in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware, seeking court orders to compel school districts to let black students attend white public schools.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas Does the segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprive the minority children of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment?

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas Thurgood Marshall argued that segregated school systems had a tendency to make black children feel inferior to white children, and thus such a system should not be legally permissible.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Kansas In the unanimous decision Chief Justice Earl Warren rejected the Plessy doctrine, declaring that separate educational facilities were inherently unequal because the intangible inequalities of segregation deprived black students of equal protection under the law

Miranda v. Arizona

Miranda v. Arizona Phoenix resident Ernesto Miranda, who was charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. Miranda was not informed of his rights prior to the police interrogation. During the two-hour interrogation, Miranda allegedly confessed to committing the crimes, which the police apparently recorded.

Miranda v. Arizona Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection against selfincrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?

Miranda v. Arizona Miranda, who had not finished ninth grade and had a history of mental instability, had no counsel present. The prosecution's case consisted solely of his confession.

Miranda v. Arizona 5 votes for Miranda, 4 vote(s) against Prosecutors could not use statements stemming from custodial interrogation of defendants unless they demonstrated the use of procedural safeguards "effective to secure the privilege against selfincrimination."

Tinker v. Des Moines

Tinker v. Des Moines Students decided to wear black armbands throughout the holiday season Students wore their armbands to school and were sent home. The following day, John Tinker did the same with the same result

Tinker v. Des Moines Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students' freedom of speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment?

Tinker v. Des Moines The parents sued the school district for violating the students right of expression and sought an injunction to prevent the school district from disciplining the students

Tinker v. Des Moines 7-2 majority for Tinker Armbands represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it The Court also held that the students did not lose their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property.

Tinker v. Des Moines Dissenting opinion - the First Amendment does not provide the right to express any opinion at any time. Because the appearance of the armbands distracted students from their work, they detracted from the ability of the school officials to perform their duties

Roe v. Wade

Roe v. Wade Roe, a Texas resident, sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion. Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant woman's life

Roe v. Wade Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?

Roe v. Wade Roe argued that "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people," protected a person's right to privacy

Roe v. Wade 7 for Roe, 2 against A woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the second and third trimesters.