-
Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Company v. City of Chicago
After an area of land was condemned, and the railroad was not given compensation, they sued. The supreme court ruled that it did not violate the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. -
Period: to
process of incorporation
. -
Gitlow v. New York
Held that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution had extended the First Amendment's provisions protecting freedom of speech and freedom of the press to apply to the governments of U.S. states -
Near v. Minnesota
A court case that ruled prior restraint on publication was found to violate the freedom of the press. This principle was applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence. -
DeJonge v. Oregon
Held that the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause applies to freedom of assembly. The Court found that Dirk De Jonge had the right to speak at a peaceful public meeting held by the Communist Party, even though the party generally advocated an industrial or political change in revolution. -
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Held that the First Amendment's federal protection of religious freedom under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to state governments too. -
Everson v. Board of Education of the Township of Ewing
a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which applied the Establishment Clause in the country's Bill of Rights to state law. Before this decision, the First Amendment's words, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" imposed limits only on the federal government, and not the state governments -
Mapp v. Ohio
In this case, the court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents prosecutors from using evidence in court that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to both the U.S. federal government and to the U.S. states. -
Robinson v. California
The first court case where the Eighth Amendment was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct. It was originally interpreted with the act of prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime -
Edwards v. South Carolina
The court ruled that the First and Fourteenth Amendments forbid state government officials from forcing a crowd to disperse when they are legally marching in front of a statehouse. -
Gideon v. Wainwright
A Court case where the Court unanimously held that in a criminal case states are required under the Sixth Amendment to provide an attorney to defendants who are unable to afford their own attorneys. -
Ker v. California
Incorporated the Fourth Amendment's protections against illegal search and seizure. -
Malloy v. Hogan
A court case which deemed defendants' Fifth Amendment privilege to not witnesses against themselves was applicable in both federal and state courts -
Pointer v. Texas
A court case involving the application of the right to confront accusers in state court proceedings. A person was arrested in Texas for robbery and was deprived of the ability to cross-examine a witness -
Miranda v. Arizona
A court case that ruled an American law enforcement officer cannot interrogate suspects without first informing them of their rights. The rights given from this case are called the Miranda Rights -
Washington v. Texas
The Court ruled that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution is applicable to both state and federal courts -
Klopfer v. North Carolina
A court case that incorporated the speedy trial clause to the state courts -
Duncan v. Louisiana
Argued whether a black male who was charged with assault was guaranteed a jury trial by the 6th Amendment. The court agreed with Duncan stating the defendant was guaranteed the right to a jury trial in all criminal cases. -
Benton v. Maryland
After a man was indicted twice for the same crime, both with different outcomes, he appealed saying that he was a victim of double jeopardy which violated the 5th amendment. The Supreme Court agreed and sided with him over Maryland. -
Schilb v. Kuebel
Argued whether or not the Illinois Bail statute was unconstitutional under the 6th Amendment. The courts ruled that, no, it was very constitutional. After a man left the scene of a car accident and was charged with violating traffic, he paid enough of his bail. However, all of his bail was not returned back to him as a small portion was taken as a bail bond cost. -
Rabe v. Washington
Rabe v. Washington, 405 U.S. 313, was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the application of obscenity laws and criminal procedure to the states. -
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger was charged with carrying a concealed weapon, and was given the maximum penalty for a misdemeanor, but had not been represented in court at that time. This resulted in a unanimous decision in favor of Argersinger because he had not been represented in court. -
McDonald v. Chicago
Several lawsuits were filed against Chicago on their gun laws, stating that it had violated the second amendment. The supreme court ruled that the second amendment had been violated, and the second amendment applied to states as well. -
Timbs v. Indiana
Supreme court case involving seizing a car used to transport and sell heroin. However the car was worth $42,000, while $10,000 is the maximum one can charge in a drug charge, which violates the 8th amendment. The Indiana supreme court overturned it, when appealed to the US supreme court, they remanded it back to the Indiana supreme court.