Good Morning, Campers:
Here's your mission for today.
1. Choose ONE additional case to work on, besides the case you were working on yesterday. Your job is to research, and determine the important information about the case. Specifically, we need to focus on whether or not the case INCREASED, or LIMITED the civil liberties of Americans.
2. When you finish your research, you will make a post to this blog, that provides a SUMMARY of your information. Your summary should contain the information asked for in yesterday's post.
Hopefully, this blog will create a reference for all of us to use as we head towards the completion of TRP (the rapumentary project).
39 comments:
case: united states vs. nixon
The civil right that is question is the
constitutional right of executive power.
President Nixon and congress was
involved with this case.
It took place in Washington D.C in
the first half of 1972
Some key events in this case are:
The "speacial prosecutor" suspended
certain types and documents of specific
meetings held in the white house.
The presidents lawyer sought to deny
the supponea.
The supreme court ruled by an 8-0 vote.
The court decided that president Nixon
must give back the specific types and documents
to the special prosecutor. Presidental
power cannot protect evidence that
may be used in a criminal trial.
This case expanded/ limited civil liberties
because.. people wanted to know everthing and not let the president hide things. So their
rights were growing not being limited.
- anastasia kiousenterlis 902 ! (=
New Jersey v. T.L.O
This case took place in 1980 in New Jersey at Piscataway High School. T.L.O and her friend were thought to be smoking in the bathroom of their school. It was a violation so they were taken to the principle's office. Her friend admitted she was smoking but T.L.O said she was not. They demanded to search her purse. They found cigarettes and rolling paper. As they continued to look they found marijuana, a pipe, plastic bags, money and a list of names that showed she was dealing. T.L.O augured that the search as unconstitutional. The question was did they violate her 4th, 5th and 14th amendment. The supreme court ruled that the search and seizure by school officials with out a warrant was constitutional as long as it was deemed reasonable.
Eleni D. period 3
CASE: TINKERV. ES MOINE SCHOOL DSTRICT.
WHAT: CIVIL RIGHTS IS IN QU7ESTION?
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
KEY EVENTS IN THE CASE:
SO TE KID COULD WEAR BLACK ARMBANDS TO GO AGAINST THE WAR.
A SYMBOL TO PROTEST PROTEST IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL.
TH WEARING OF THE ARMBAND WAS AN EXCERSISE OF THE STUDENTS, RIGHT TO FREE, SLIENT, SYMBOLIC SPEECH, WHICH IS PROTRCTED UNDER THE FIRST ADMENDEMENTS.
WHIO'S INVOLVED
MARYBETH AND JOHN TINKER
WHERE?
IOWA
WHEN? 1969
HOW DIDI THE SUPREME COURT RULE:
THEY DECIDE IF STUDNETS HAVE THE WRITE TO WEAR ARMBANDS.
THIS CAS( EXPANDED/LIMTEDD) CIVIL LIBERTY BECASUE:
IT RESONED THAT THE WERING OF THE ADMENDEMENTS WAS AN EXERISE OF THE STUDENTS RIGHT TO FOR SILENT SYMBOLISC SPEECH.
DESIRAE LAFURNO
Case two
Case- new jersey v. TLO
Who’s involved- supreme court [nj], TLO, principle
Where- new jersey
When- 1985
What civil rights in question?- the 10th amendment vs, the 4th and the 14th amendment
Key events in the case-
*accused of smoking in the girls bathroom
*she denied that she was smoking in the girls bathroom
*when the principal search through her bag he found a box of cigarettes which lead him to find other illegal substances.
This case [expanded/limited] civil liberties because…
This case is limited.
mapp vs. ohio.
involved- miss mapp, police.
where- cleveland , ohio.
when-may 1957.
Events- police recieve a tip that miss mapp was in possession of a large # of betting slips & that a bomber was hiding in her home. Mapp refuses them to search her house.A month later they arrest her and find obsene objects in her home.
Rule- Ruling was in mapps favor. State cannot evidence by uptained on illegal means.
question- 4th amendment search and seizure
Adriana c. prd 3 :]
hazlewood school district vs. kuhlmeir
in 1988 a high school student named kathy kuhlmeir and two other students appealed the principabl's deasishion by putting articles dealing with student pregnance and divorce. the students had the right to say whatever they wanted to due to the freedom of shpeech that is stated in the US constitution.the issue in this case is to see if hazlewood school district violated the right of freedom of expression the right of the 1st amendment by regulating the content of its school newspaper. the sc ruled that hazlewood school district didnt voilate the 1st amendment becouse the students were using inapproprate language in the article and the students described spicific students even thought they were not named they could be identified.the way this dissishoin limited the the rights of students in school was that they werent able to speek freely at all times.
natalie slavova
We have done the case alled mapp v. ohio. in this case Dollree Mapp of Cleveland, ohio was in her home with her ddaughter. the police came demanding her to open her without providing a valid search warrant. The police forcibly came in through another entrance and searched her house for a ictim conneted to a bombing. instead they founbd posession of obsene materials. ashe was sentenced to 1 to 7 years. She later brought the case to the supreme court and they denied her appeal.
nadya Stevens
mollie Killen
The case that I did today was Ex Parte Merryman. It took place in Maryland, 1861.
The civil rights in question, was the right of the accused.
In 1861, a month after the war began, John Merryman was arrested and jailed for burning railroad bridges. His arrest was based on a vague suspicion of treason. There was no warrant issue, and also no witnesses, and no proof of illegal action. He wrote to the Cheif Justice Roger Taney, asking for a writ of Habeas corpus, so that his case could be tried in a cilvlian court.
The SC ruled, by handing over Merryman to civilian authorities and Congress gave the President the power to suspend the privileges of habeas corpus at his discretion during wartime
Anastasia Papis 903 period 4
CASE: KOREMATSU v. UNITED STATES
WHO WASINVOLVE: FRED KOREMATSU AND THE UNITED STATES
CIVIL RIGHTS QUESTION?-THE 14TH AMENDMENT,THE UNITEDSTATES ACTIONS WENT AGAINST THE 14TH AMENDMENTB/C THEY HADNORIGHT TOP ENDANGER ALL JAPANESE CITIZENS
WHERE/WHEN??- OCCURED DURING WW2 AND ARGUEDON OCT.11-12,1944 AND DECIDED ON DEEMBER 18,1944,LOCATEDIN CALIFORNIA
KEY EVENTS: JAPAN CITIZENS WERE PLACED IN CONCENTRATION CAMPS B/CTHE JAPANESE ATTACKED PEARL HARBOR TRIGGERING THIS
DEISION: JUSTICE BLACK FUTHER DENIED THAT THE ASE HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITHRAIAL PREJUDICE.
THIS AFFECTEDCIVIL RIGHTS OF THE JAPANESE ITIZENS B/C THEY WERE PALCED IN CONCENTRATION CAMPS FOR NO REASON.
karenc,
mapp vs, ohio
cleveland, ohio ; dollree mapp ; 1961; amendment four; did they need a warrant?; expanded civil liberties because police arent alowed to sarch your home without a warrat; court overturned.
karenc,
mapp vs, ohio
cleveland, ohio ; dollree mapp ; 1961; amendment four; did they need a warrant?; expanded civil liberties because police arent alowed to sarch your home without a warrat; court overturned.
The case I researched yesterday was Schenck versus the U.S.It happened in 1919 during world war one.The espionage act was passed it was a federal law passed shortly after world war one.The rights that were in question was freedom of speech and freedom of the press.Supreme court ruled that by obstructing the process where people would be recruited.
Cisco Cespon
History
Period 6
Gideon V. Wanwright
This took place in 1961. The case originated in Florida. The case involved the state of Florida and Clarence Earl Gideon. He broke and entered a pool hall with the intent to commit a felony and he was not provided with a counsel. It got to the Supreme Court after Gideon was sentenced to 5 years and filled a petition of appeal asking for a court review. The petition was granted. The civil liberty involved was the right of counsel. The supreme court overturned the decision and found him not guilty because the state of Florida must provide an sttorney in all felony and criminal charges. This expaneded the civil liberties of america because they found him not guilty because since he didnt have enough money to get a attorny and Florida didnt give him one.
---Kristofer D. 902
The Bethel vs Frasier Case,1986
*1st and 14th amendment vs 10th amendment
This case involved steven Frasier and Bethel School District. Steven Frasier was suspended because he spoke of inappropriet language in a speech which included sexual refrences and innuendoes.
*The civil Rights involved was the Bill Of Rights,
Civil Liberties, Rights accused, and State reserved Rights of Education. The Supreme court found that the district had constitutional authority to limit his speech because Education authority that is given to schools by the 10th amendment.
*This case was limited because it shows that freedom of speech can decrease if it interfears with the learning of others.
Bridgette Valenzuela
Period 6
The case I did yesterday, was called Bethel vs. Frazier. This case was about a boy named Matthew Frazier, he lived in Southeastern Pennslyvania. He attended school in the Bethel School District. On April 26, 1983; Frazier made a speech for his school. His speech contained sexual innendoes and very bad phrases. So, his principal suspended him. He thought that was wrong. So, he went to to court. The rights that were in question were the first amendment freedom of speech rights. The case was tried and eventually the Supreme Court ruled against Frazier and said the prinicpal of his school had every right to suspend him because his speech was innapporate for his school suroundings.
CeCe Howard
The Dred Scott vs Sanford, 1857
*This involved Dred Scott and The Supreme Court
*The civil rights involved were the Cival war, federalism, Equality, and the Rights of Ethnic Group.
Dre Scott was a slave who brought in to free and territory as defined by the Missouri Compromise.
The Supreme court declared that slaves were property and as such were not protected by constitution. This declared The Missouri Compromise unconstututional.
This limits civil Liberties becasue the Missouricompromise was unconstitutional at the time meaning he was still a slave.
Bridgette Valenzuela
period 6
Gisselle Bonilla
CASE:app vs.ohio
Who invold:Dollree mapp
What civil rights in question?over turmed.
Where?Cleveland,ohio
When? 1961
key events in the case?
.had a probale cause
.they took it to the supreme court
.found negative
.had no warrant
How did the supreme court rule?
amemdent 4
This case (expand/limited)civil liberties because...this case was expanded because the police avent aloowed to search your home witout a warrnant.
My case was Engle vs Vital. It was in important issue because a school in New Hyde Park added a new period in the beggining of class to prey for fifteen minutes. This became a bigger problem than intended because people who belive different still had to prey. Parents and the Board Of Ed had an argument that soon went to court. The court had dcided that the prayers violated peoples rights and religion. As of now, prayers are not happening in the schools of the New Hyde Park area.
Case:Mapp Vs. Ohio
Where:Cleveland,Ohio
When:1961
Key Events:The police broke into her house without a warrant but had a proable cause.The police thought that she was hiding a person suspected in bombing.They arrested her because she had illegal photos.She took it to the supreme court of Ohio than the United States supreme court.
How Did The Supreme Court Rule:They overturned her conviction because they both were wrong.
This expaned the civil liberties because the police are not allowed to enter your homoe without a search warrant.
-Chrissy Thomatos Period 7
CASE:Gideon vs. Wanwright
WHO'S INVOLVED: Clarence Earl Giden and the state of florida.
WHAT CIVIL RIGHT ISIN QUESTION: The right to council.
WHERE:Florida
WHEN:1961
KEY EVENTS IN CASE:-He broke and entered a pool hall with intent to commit a felony
-Was not provided with a lawyer request was denied
-Sentenced five years
-Filled a petition of appeal to the supremecourt found him guilty tehn overturned
Daniela VArcasia
period 3 903
Case: Texas v. Johnson
whos involved: Gregory Lee Johnson, supreme court and President Ronald Reagan.
where:Dallas City Hall
when: 1984
key events in the case: Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag in front of the Dallas City Hall to protest against the policies of President Ronald Reagans administration. In Texas it is against the law to burn the American flag. Johnson argued that his first amendment rights were being violated
- Nick C. 901
Case:Tinker vs. Des Moines
This took place in december of 1965.
The case originated in Iowa public school.The people whowas involed with this case is John and Mary Tinker.
It went through the school and then went to trial and finally reached the supreme court and first went in favor of the school then the supreme court ruled in favor of the childern.
The civil liberty that was involed with this case was the first,fourtheen and the tenth amendment. The bill of rights and the civil liberty of the vietam war.
The supreme court ruled in favor of the children because it was declared that the armbands was protected by the first amendment. The right of freedom of speech.
The ruling did not expand or limit the civil liberties of americans because it was freedom of speech and it was the first amendment as well.
By Erin O'Driscoll and Tanya Castillo pd.7
Case : Brown vs. Board of Education
The amendment being questioned is the fourteenth.This gave the equal protection of education no matter race or gender.However, this amendment was abused.The defendant "Brown" was denied enrollment in an all white school near her home.This case challenged the seperate but equal policy of the topeka school district.The outcome was the most celebrated cases, the court struck down seperate but equal and ordered integragation in the nation's schools with a deliberate speed.Brown won the case. A couple of year later another case of segragation occured.This involved four african american chidren.
Billy Poulos
902
The case i am studying is Bethel Vs. Fraiser. This case took place in 1986 in Washington. This case involves Bethel High School and Steve Fraiser (student). Steve Fraiser was suspended for making an inappropriate speech in school. This was taken to the supreme court. The civil rights that were in question were amendment 1 and 10. When this case was brought to the supreme court they ruled that the district has the constitutional authority to limit Steve Fraiser's speech because the educational authority given to schools by the 10th amendment. The reason why the ruled that is because once you are in school according to the 10th amendment school's have the right to limit what you say.
JACLYN LEONE
PERIOD 7
Case: Plessy vs. Ferguson
The state of louisisana enacted a law that required seperate railway cars for blacks and whites.In 1892, Homer Adolph Plessy-- who was seven eighths caucasion--took a seat in a "Whites only" car of a Louisiana train. He refused to move out of the car reserved for blacks and was arrested. The Supreme Court ruled that the "seperate but equal " provison of the Louisiana law was constitutional.The case established the principle of segragation until it was over turned in 1954.The fourteenth amendment equal protection claus vs. Louisiana tenth amendment reserved power right to legislative branch.
Christopher Caraballo
period 7
CASE:University of California vs. Bakke
This case took place in 1978. Alan Bakke was denied admission to the medical school in the University of California even though his scores were higher than those of minority candidates who had seats set aside for them. There were 2 amendments that were having a conflict. The 10th amendment reserved power of education vs. the 14th amendment (equal protection clause.) The supreme court ruled that the policy was constitutional. The policy was that a state supported school could take race into account when deciding the admission of a student. The court said that as long as the policy doesn't insult a certain culture, schools could use it. This case was a tie. Tje justics couldn't decide, so the outcome was fifty-fifty of each decision. However, the oucome of this case expanded the rights of Americans.
By:Mariela O(per 7)
Roe vs. Wade
In this case, Roe fought for the right to get an abortion. The result of the case was that the way Roe was charged invaded her right to privacy. Mjority won and the charges were dropped. In the result of the case, 46 states changed the law on the right to get an abortion.
(901) -Keenan Parente, and Andre Londono
President Nixon was found in the middle of what was known as the Water gate scandal. He was accused of bugging the presidential candidates headquarters.
President Nixon as later suppoeanad and was asked to hand over the Water Gate tapes. President Nixon felt that since he was now the Prsident he had an executive privilage so he did not hand over the tapes.
Later the court ruled the even though Nixon had an executive privilage it did not count for this case. The reason bein is for the fact that this issue is of criminal offense. Nixon then was forced to hand over the tapes and he later resigned from office.
Maria Q
period:8
CASE: Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
WHEN/WHERE: 1988,St. Louis County, Missouri
KEY EVENTS IN THE CASE:
The journalism class at Hazelwood East High School. They gave there finished article to Priniciple Reynolds. The prinicipal went over the articles, he did not like the articles about student pregnancy, sex and birth control, and divorce. Instead of telling the journalism students so they culd change their articles he told Emerson to take those pages out of the artlce. The students became very angry, they could ahve fixed then if renolds gave them a chance. The journalism students belived that that was a violation of their 1st amendment.They went to the U.S. District Court. The court did not agree with them. It said that school officials may limit students' speech in the school newspaper if their decision has "a substantial and reasonable basis." In other words, if there was a good reason, it is okay for a principal to limit students speech. The students appealed the decision.This court said that the school paper was a "public forum," or place where students could express their views. The judges said that the school could not censor the paper except "to avoid substantial interference with school work or discipline or the rights of others".The school appealed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court thought that this was an important case. It dealt with the rights of students. It agreed to hear arguments from both sides.
The case increased the civil liberties of Americans because the court of appeals said that what the prinicpal did was unconstitutonal. (but it does not say what the supreme court ruled)
:-]
Case: university of California V. Bakke
Time: 1978
Background: Alan Bakke was denied admission to the medical school in the university of California even though his scores were higher then those who of minority candidates who had set aside seats for him.
Why the supreme court: this case went to the supreme court because Bakke argued than the requirements for special admissions for medical school were discriminatory because only African-Americans, Chicano, and Asian students could compete for these places. The university of California argued than t special admissions program remedied the long standing historical long of racial discrimination.
As a result Bakke won a seat at the school. However the supreme courts decision over weather the schools acceptance requirements were constitutional was a almost a tie. They had no decision. So the university of California is still allowed to use race as a factor in their acceptance process.
-jamie =], melissa I =], monica T =]
New York Times Vs. US
In this case the New Times published serveral articvles called the Pentagon Papers in 1971. These papers exposed the many injustices of the American involvement in Vietnam such Mai Lai massacre in which many unarmed civilians were killed. Theses papers were condemned by the Pentagon and was challeged by them. Supreme court ruled that the New York Times did not do anything wrong and the 1st amendment permitts the freedom of the press. Therefore, this lead to the embarrasment of the president.
Case: West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette.
What: It was parr of the law to salute the flag and say the pledge every morning but Barnette who was a Jehovah witness decided not to.
Key Events: This was almost like a protest because several other Jehovah Witnesses decided to do this to, to stop the board of ed. from following through with this law.
Where: West Virginia
When:1945
How did the sumpreme court rule: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Barnette and other Jehovah witnesses. They were prtected by the First Amendment.
Christina Wylie
Period 4
The case that I did today was Scott vs. Sanford which was in 1857. This took place in Missouri. Dred Scott and John Sanford were involved in this case. Some key events that were in this case are:
- Was a lawsuit, pivotal in history of the U.S. decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1857 that ruled that people of African descent, whether or not they were slaves, could never be citizens of the United States.
-Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories.
-Was also ruled that slaves could not sue in court were private property and being private property, can't be taken away from their owners without due process. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Congess.
Maria A Period: 7
CASE: Dorr vs. United States.
After the spanish war had finished, the United States had the possesion of other countries including The Philipens. In that country, the editor of the Radical Newspaper Dorr wrote about opposing
the United States government. He was arrested and requested to have trial by jury but that was denied. He argued that by dening his request for a trail by jury was a violation of his constitutional rights. The supreme court ruled that the trial by jury isn't a neccessary. This case limits the civil liberties because it proves that in court cases your requests can be denied.
Livi Cabrera
case us vs lopez
who's involved alfonzo lopez
when 1995
where san antonio (highschool)
texas
key events
* was caught carrying a concealed weapon in the high school
* he was charged under texas law with fire arm possesionon school premises
* The next day the state charges were dismissed after federalagents charged lopez with voilating a federal criminal statue, which is the gun free zone act of 1990
how did the supreme court rule
The supreme court ruled that it was unconstitutional because the federal goverment failed to proove that there was a compelling national interest to have such a law.
This case is limited / expanded civil liberties because ...
?
Case: Roe v. Wade
When:
-It was originally argued on Dec. 13,1971. Then reargued on Oct. 11,1972. The disicion was made on Jan. 22,1973.
Where:
-Texas
Who was involved:
-A single pregnant woman, Ms. Jane Roe, and the District attorney of the county.
How did it get to the Supreme Court:
-The judge panel found that the law violated Ms. Roe's rights but refused to issue a ban that would have prevented the law from being enforced against all pregnant women because at that time abortion was legal in some states but illegal in other.
What Civil Liberty was involved?
-She brought the Texas law to court saying it violates her right of personal liberty given in the fourteenth amendment and her right to privacy protected by the Bill of Rights.
How did the Supreme Court Rule?
-The court established the right of abortion
Did the ruling EXPAND, or LIMIT the Civil Liberties of Americans?
-The ruling of the case expanded the civil liberties of Americans because it give the women the right to choose for themseveles, whether they want to have an abortion or not.
S.Rahaman
period 7
CASE: Vernonia v Acton (1995)
WHO: James Acton
WHAT: he refused to take a random drug test in order to play a school sport.
HOW DID THE SUPREME COURT RULE: the Court ruled that the school was allowed to have a random drug test and that there is no actual right for privacy protection.
Does drug testing of students athletes violate their protection against unreasonable search and seizure provided in the Fourth Amendment: Well as long as they do have some type of warrant saying they were allowed to do what they were doing the test should have been ok. Also its obvious when the student would refuse to take the test he probably were taking drugs.
-Rabaya Rahman
period 7
case study: McCulloch v. Maryland
The civil right it talked about was the right to tax. It took place in 1819. The bank wanted to tax Mr. M for something and he didnt think he should have to pay for it. The case took plave in Maryland and then went to the supreme court. The supreme court ruled against Maryland saying that congress did not have the power in incorporate a bank. This ruling limited the power of the congress.
~sarah bianchi
Veronia School District v. Acton
Involved- James Acton
Where- Vernonia, Oregon
When- June 1995
Events- Students in this school district sports teams, were being randomly tested for drugs. Students had to go through a series of tests, for no apparent reason.
Rule- This conduct violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures. Meaning that these series of tests were unreasonable, but yet done anyway.
Expanded or Limited Civil Rights?
This case limited civil rights. This is because, the students had no right to be put through drug tests. There was no reason for this, and it violated themselves. Nothing was said about drugs being used, it was just a random thing.
Post a Comment