Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Bill of Rights (5th Amendment (The right to indictment by the grand jury…

- - - - The Court examined whether the state of South Carolina violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment in denying unemployment benefits to a person for turning down a job, because it required him or her to work on the Sabbath. The Court ruled 7-2 that the South Carolina statute did impede a person’s right to freely exercise religion, in violation of the Free Exercise Clause.
        Reynolds v. United States (1879)
        The Court examined whether the federal anti-bigamy statute violated the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, because plural marriage is part of religious practice. It unanimously upheld the federal law banning polygamy
  - - - Abrams v. United States (1919)
        The First Amendment did not protect printing leaflets urging to resist the war effort, calling for a general strike, and advocating violent revolution.
        Debs v. United States (1919)
        The First Amendment did not protect an anti-war speech designed to obstruct recruiting.
  - - - New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
        The First Amendment protected all statements about public officials unless the speaker lied with the intent to defame.
        Garrison v. Louisiana (1964)
        A Louisiana law that punished true statements made with “actual malice” was overturned. The Court ruled that unless a newspaper shows “reckless disregard for the truth,” it is protected under the First Amendment.
  - - - NAACP v Alabama (1958)
        Alabama sought to prevent the NAACP from conducting further business in the state. The NAACP won.
        Rotary International v Rotary Club of Duarte (1987)
        CA law requiring Rotary Clubs to admit women is constitutional. women members would not prevent the group from accomplishing its goals, state's compelling interest in ending sexual discrimination outweighed the infringement on the groups right of association.
  - - - Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation (1999)
        The Court ruled that states could not require petition circulators to be registered voters, wear name badges, or disclose information about themselves and their salaries.
        John Doe #1 v. Reed (2010)
        The Supreme Court ruled that the government’s disclosure of the names of voters who signed a referendum petition did not violate the First Amendment.
- - - - United States v. Hayes, 555 U.S. 415, (2009).
        The Supreme Court affirmed the use of a federal law barring people convicted of domestic violence crimes from owning guns. The Court held that states laws against battery need not specifically mention domestic violence to fall under the domestic violence gun ban that was enacted in 1996; the victim of such a crime need only be involved in a domestic relationship with the attacker.
        
        United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875). In the first case to deal with the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment does not bar state regulation of firearms. The Court stated that the Second Amendment “has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government.” While the Cruikshank ruling primarily functioned as a way to disarm African American residents while protecting white Southern paramilitary groups and only addresses the Second Amendment in passing, it remains frequently cited when answering questions on the function and scope of the Second Amendment.
- - - - Weeks v. United States, 1914
        Police officers in Kansas City, Missouri went to the house of Mr. Fremont Weeks and used his hidden key to enter and search his home. While there, they took papers, letters, books, and other items. They did not have a search warrant. These items were used in court to find Mr. Weeks guilty of sending lottery tickets through the U.S. mail Vernonia School District v. Acton, 1995
        A school district adopted a policy authorizing random drug testing of student athletes. There was a known drug problem in the school district. Student athletes were among the drug users and dealers. Along with the drug problem came serious student behavior issues. By 1989, disciplinary actions had reached ‘epic proportions,’ motivating the district to introduce the Student Athlete Drug Policy. James Acton, a 7th grader, refused the testing, and his parents refused to consent to the testing. Because of this, he was not allowed to participate in football. He sued the school district for violating his rights.