Civil+Liberties+Court+Cases


 * Freedom of Religion Cases**

1.Is the money going towards a secular purpose?(transportation, lunch, construction, etc.) 2. Does the use of the money advance you religion and/or prohibit someone elses' religion? 3. Do you have to question if the money is being used for a religious purpose? (catch-all) If any of these three stipulations are failed, federal funding will be withheld.
 * Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971):**Defined what funding parochial (religion-based) schools could receive federal aid for.Introduced the Lemon Test


 * Zelman v. Simmons-Harris:** Vouchers can't be used towards religious schools; only allowed to be used towards government accredited schools.


 * Kiryas Joel v. Grumet:** NY state public school; most people in town were Orthodox Jews. Regents of NY wanted to put in special ed program. The school schooled because this would cause the school to no longer have an exclusively Jewish student body. Supreme Court rules in favor of the State of NY.


 * Engel v. Vitale (1960):**Supreme Court rules that prayer or encouragement to pray in public schools is unconstitutional.


 * Schempp Case:** Bible reading in public schools is declared unconstitutional.


 * Cantwell:** Jehovah's Witness family moves to a no soliciting neighborhood and thrown in jail.Supreme Court rules this unconstitutional due to free exercise.


 * Smith:**Native American workers who smoke peyote as part of their religion sign a contract at their job consenting to random drug testing and were fired. They demanded unemployment. Ruled against, saying that they knew there was a chance this would happen when they took the job.


 * Freedom of Speech Cases**

1. Does it lack social importance? 2. Would an average person deem it innappropriate
 * Roth v. US**: First test for obscenity formed:

1. Does it create lust? 2. Does it portray offensive sexuality 3. Does the work lack artistic,literary, political, or scientific value?
 * Miller v. California**: Mass mailing of advertisement for an adult store;moves responsibility of judging obscenity to state government.


 * Texas v. Johnson:** Flag Burning case. First case dealing with symbolic speech. Protected


 * Tinker v. Des Moines**: War protest wrist bands in schools. Upheld the right to wear them.


 * Commercial speech is not protected. The FTC regulates this.


 * Freedom of the Press Cases**


 * Zercher v. Stanford Daily**: University newspaper takes pictures of a violent protest;refuses to share them with police. Court rules that they are required to share the pictures.


 * Near v. Minnesota:** Tried to shut down a newspaper;established that prior restraint is required to shut down.


 * NY Times v. Sullivan:** Police chief in Birmingham, Alabama sues saying that they are slandering him. Can't be stopped because he is a public figure and he couldn't prove it was done with malicious intent.


 * Hustler v. Fallwell:** Sues for slander. Ruled in favor of Hustler because it was not done with malicious intent.


 * Miami Herald v. Tomillo**:Fairness Doctrine doesn't apply to newspapers. Both sides being allowed to speak causes "chilling the speech". Established newspaper as most protected news medium.


 * Red Lion Publishing Company v. FCC**: Fairness doctrine- If you criticize a group or person, you have to allow the other side to respond. This case has the fairness doctrine done away with in the 1980's.


 * Right to Assemble Cases=**


 * NAACP v. Alabama**: Alabama allowed NAACP to assemble for a protest ,but wanted its membership list. Ruled unconstitutional.


 * Rights of the Accused Cases**


 * Mapp v. Ohio**: Police enter Mapp's home looking for a bombing suspect. While searching they find porn. Mapp arrested. Mapp sues saying that they didn't have a warrant for porn. Mapp wins.


 * Terry v. Ohio**: Patdown findings can be used to reach a guilty verdict.


 * Gideon v. Wainright**: Poor man isn't given a lawyer by the state and is convicted. Sues on the basis of not being given a fair trial. He is then given a lawyer and tried again, and is this time found innocent.


 * Furman v. Georgia**: It is ruled that Georgia's death penalty is implemented strangely and/or cruelly.


 * Gregg v. Georgia**: Reinstate the death penalty in a correct and fair way.


 * Right to Privacy Cases**


 * Griswold v. Connecticut**: Altered some of the rules Planned Parenthood put forth regarding receiving birth control because some of them infringe on people's right to privacy.


 * Roe v. Wade**: Ruled that abortion is legal within the first trimester because a woman has the right to do what she wants concerning her body.


 * Planned Parenthood v. Casey**: States are allowed to put restrictions on abortion as long as they don't put undo burden on the mother.

Notes by Amie Parris. Typing and editing by Caleb Foster