Which case decided by the Supreme Court, the United States v. Virginia or Davis v. Beason. involved the First Amendment of the United States Constitution?
5678128f7631e8cba95d9217e4dd0fc9
United States v. Virginia United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996) , is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the long-standing male-only admission policy of the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in a 7-1 decision. (Justice Clarence Thomas, whose son was enrolled at VMI at the time, recused himself.)
d549211301416a373783f643f98def21
Davis v. Beason Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890), was a United States Supreme Court case affirming, by a 9-0 vote, that federal laws against polygamy did not conflict with the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
11d23ee823d8dbf197e7a2c09f3f48ca
Maryland in the American Civil War During the American Civil War, Maryland, a slave state, was one of the border states, straddling the South and North. Because of its strategic location, bordering the capital city of Washington D.C., and the strong desire of the opposing factions within the state to sway public opinion towards their respective causes, Maryland would play an important role in the American Civil War. Abraham Lincoln's suspension of "habeas corpus" in Maryland, and his dismissal of the Supreme Court's decision that the suspension was unconstitutional, would leave lasting scars. The court was led by Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney, a Marylander.
a8f1f88153bf9a1181efe6683bc2bdd4
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Incorporation, in U.S. law, is the process by which American courts have applied portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights to the states. When it was first ratified, the Bill of Rights only protected the rights it enumerated from federal infringement, allowing states and local governments to abridge them. However, beginning in 1897 with "Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad v. City of Chicago", various portions have been held to be incorporated against state and local government through the Fourteenth Amendment.
a1116b3a4a1f45000dd2f21da42b8c3c
Downes v. Bidwell Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901) , was a case in which the US Supreme Court decided whether US territories were subject to the provisions and protections of the US Constitution. This issue is sometimes stated as whether the Constitution follows the flag. The resulting decision narrowly held that the Constitution did not necessarily apply to territories. Instead, the US Congress had jurisdiction to create law within territories in certain circumstances, particularly in those dealing with revenue, which would not be allowed by the Constitution for proper states within the Union. It has become known as one of the "Insular Cases".
e1a3ea1db479af1391d55c02652bc581
Vicinage Clause The Vicinage Clause is a provision in the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution regulating the vicinity from which a jury pool may be selected. The clause says that the accused shall be entitled to a jury "of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law". The Vicinage Clause limits the vicinity of criminal jury selection to both the state and the federal judicial district where the crime has been committed whereas the venue provision of Article Three of the United States Constitution regulates the location of the actual trial.
ca44025bcffa5686a89cbc11010e3c32
United States v. Miller United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) , was a Supreme Court case that involved a Second Amendment challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). "Miller" is often cited in the ongoing American gun politics debate, as both sides claim that it supports their position.
52ea5af426228cb71dcdf16990693b2b
Frank v. Maryland Frank v. Maryland, 359 U.S. 360 (1959) , was a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
c7579c75580fd9117a64d5183933ac51
First Freedom Center The First Freedom Center is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit located in Richmond, Virginia. Its mission is to commemorate and educate about freedom of religion and conscience as proclaimed in Thomas Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. Located in the Shockoe Slip district of downtown Richmond, the Center sits on the site where Jefferson's statute was enacted into law by the Virginia General Assembly on January 16, 1786. Championed through the Virginia General Assembly by James Madison, the statute was the first law of absolute religious freedom enacted in the young nation and served as a template for the religion clauses of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which would be ratified five years later (1791).
1162ffcb5c4ad96642359900ea3fb09c
Van Staphorst v. Maryland Van Staphorst v. Maryland, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 401 (1791), was the first case docketed with the United States Supreme Court. Although the court agreed to hear and decide the case, the suit was settled before oral arguments. "Collet v. Collet" was the first appellate case docketed with the court. "West v. Barnes" was the first case decided by the court.
8ef5627cf8c100ebebb67d70d7ec717e
Van Orden v. Perry Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677 (2005) , was a United States Supreme Court case involving whether a display of the Ten Commandments on a monument given to the government at the Texas State Capitol in Austin violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
f68f9945a61c7252e7b738e969e48976
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al., 484 U.S. 260 (1988) , was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that public school curricular student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established (by policy or practice) as forums for student expression.
33aca5b3c28929384fe192f3a9e6038d
Brown v. Maryland Brown v. Maryland, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 419 (1827), was a significant United States Supreme Court case which interpreted the Import-Export and Commerce Clauses of the U.S. Constitution to prohibit discriminatory taxation by states against imported items after importation, rather than only at the time of importation. The state of Maryland passed a law requiring importers of foreign goods to obtain a license for selling their products. Brown was charged under this law and appealed. It was the first case in which the U.S. Supreme Court construed the Import-Export Clause. Chief Justice John Marshall delivered the opinion of the court, ruling that Maryland's statute violated the import-export and commerce clauses and the federal law was supreme. He alleged that the power of a state to tax goods did not apply if they remained in their "original package". A license tax on the importer was essentially the same as a tax on an import itself. Despite arguing the case for Maryland, future chief justice Roger Taney admitted that the case was correctly decided.
f5ebeccf7e0951dccd4e02fcf772be3f
Adderley v. Florida Adderley v. Florida, 385 U.S. 39 (1966) , was a United States Supreme Court case regarding whether arrests for protesting in front of a jail were constitutional.
a75c3071a81000594d11d1cdd69d2d43
Reid v. Covert Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957) , is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that American civilians outside of the territorial jurisdiction of the United States cannot be tried by U.S. military tribunal, but instead retain the protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution, in this case, trial by jury.
955450ca78ba6b9f3c3bc971de5961c6
United States v. Lopez United States v. Alfonso D. Lopez, Jr., 514 U.S. 549 (1995) was the second United States Supreme Court case since the New Deal to set limits to Congress' power under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court held that the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which banned possession of handguns near schools, was unconstitutional because it did not have a substantial impact on interstate commerce. After the "Lopez" decision, the act was amended to specifically only apply to guns that had been moved via interstate commerce.
99e0ea0588030c32c61ac28d93136781
Doyle v. Ohio Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding the Due Process rights of the Fourteenth Amendment.
848c125c3392d1f31e24aa5010892aa5
Elkins v. United States Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 (1960) , was a US Supreme Court decision that held the "silver platter doctrine", which allowed federal prosecutors to use evidence illegally gathered by state police, to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
79261b9abed83396c48e3db27ff77189
Communist Party of Indiana v. Whitcomb Communist Party of Indiana v. Whitcomb, 414 U.S. 441 (1974), was a United States Supreme Court case based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that invalidated Indiana's loyalty oath requirement.
95d2927369f95f1d1a55b34a0244c3b1
Branzburg v. Hayes Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972), was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision invalidating the use of the First Amendment as a defense for reporters summoned to testify before a grand jury. The case was argued February 23, 1972 and decided June 29 of the same year. The reporter lost his case by a vote of 5-4. This case is cited for the rule that in federal courts, a reporter may not generally avoid testifying in a criminal grand jury, and it remains the only case in which the U.S. Supreme Court has considered the use of "reporters' privilege".
ce03df9b5aae182d7fe701fb6681116e
Duren v. Missouri Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357 (1979) , was a United States Supreme Court case related to the Sixth Amendment. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who later became a Supreme Court Justice herself, and Lee Nation argued for Duren in what became Ginsburg's last case before the Supreme Court as an attorney. Part of her argument was that making jury duty optional for women should be struck down because it treated women's service on juries as less valuable than men's.
459b5c10eb5870404dced62d30909e45
Zellers v. Huff The Dixon School Case (Zellers v. Huff) was a lawsuit started in 1948 in New Mexico contesting the use of nuns, religious brothers and priests as teachers in publicly supported schools under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case involved thirty schools in eleven New Mexico counties, twenty-eight plaintiffs, two hundred defendants, and public expenditures to the schools of over $600,000 annually. Following on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in "Everson v. Board of Education", which applied First Amendment freedoms to state as well as federal law, the Dixon School Case was the first state case to implement separation of church and state in public schools, and was watched with interest nationally.