Which US Supreme Court case was earlier, Strauder v. West Virginia or Wisconsin v. Yoder?
40a5e1fec598289a6a5c49705bd6c217
Strauder v. West Virginia Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (1880) , was a United States Supreme Court case about racial discrimination. "Strauder" was the first time that the Court had reversed a state criminal conviction for a violation of a constitutional provision concerning criminal procedure.
63c770617e136374a631a6a2ddc81d2c
Wisconsin v. Yoder Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), is the case in which the United States Supreme Court found that Amish children could not be placed under compulsory education past 8th grade. The parents' fundamental right to freedom of religion was determined to outweigh the state's interest in educating its children. The case is often cited as a basis for parents' right to educate their children outside of traditional private or public schools.
e0f8375e7cc638ca2679fd9f4ed2a7df
Carl Yoder Carl M. Yoder was a leading Cleveland, Ohio, industrialist in the first half of the 20th century. He was the founder and president of The Yoder Company from 1910 until his death in 1944.
32bb3fe0d00074dcc7fe99c4319f5d42
Rader v. State Rader v. State, 73 Tenn. 610 (1880), was a case decided by the Tennessee Supreme Court that held that to fulfill requirement of deliberation for first degree murder the purpose to kill may be formed a mere moment before the act, but deliberation does require some length of time for cool reflection free from excitement or passion.
5aa1d714da0ec9052d92df0de3e7c043
Linder v. United States Linder v. United States, 268 U.S. 5 (1925) , is a Supreme Court case involving the applicability of the Harrison Act. The Harrison Act was originally a taxing measure on drugs such as morphine and cocaine, but it later effectively became a prohibition on such drugs. However, the Act had a provision exempting doctors prescribing the drugs. Dr. Nick Linder prescribed the drugs to addicts in Moore, Oklahoma, which the federal government said was not a legitimate medical practice. He was prosecuted and convicted. Linder appealed, and the Supreme Court unanimously overturned his conviction, holding that the federal government overstepped its power to regulate medicine. The opinion of the court was written by Justice James Clark McReynolds and states, "Obviously, direct control of medical practice in the states is beyond the power of the federal government."
687fb76c416959980b52d4fc0779387b
Louie Willard Strum Louie Willard Strum (January 16, 1890 – July 26, 1954) was an American lawyer and judge.
f4be3c25fc0181fdbd7f8e651dbbec6d
The switch in time that saved nine "The switch in time that saved nine" is the name given to what was perceived as the sudden jurisprudential shift by Associate Justice Owen Roberts of the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1937 case "West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish". Conventional historical accounts portrayed the Court's majority opinion as a strategic political move to protect the Court's integrity and independence from President Franklin Roosevelt's court-reform bill (also known as the "court-packing plan"), which would have expanded the size of the bench up to 15 justices, though it has been argued that these accounts have misconstrued the historical record.
3002a650da78bdb9c2e688bddb2d00ca
Hodel v. Irving Hodel v. Irving, 481 U.S. 704 (1987), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that a statute ordering the escheat of fractional interests in real property which had been bequeathed to members of the Oglala Sioux tribe was an unconstitutional taking which required just compensation.
7bcd034548aa39cf3f3c54e157366a27
Gibbons v. Ogden Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824), was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the power to regulate interstate commerce, granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, encompassed the power to regulate navigation. The case was argued by some of America's most admired and capable attorneys at the time. Exiled Irish patriot Thomas Addis Emmet and Thomas J. Oakley argued for Ogden, while U.S. Attorney General William Wirt and Daniel Webster argued for Gibbons.
7b07d87387cebccd488c194ded46eadc
Jacobson v. Massachusetts Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that the freedom of the individual must sometimes be subordinated to the common welfare and is subject to the police power of the state.
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.
45a16cb930509afaf7bd68a479debd8a
Rochin v. California Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that added behavior that "shocks the conscience" into tests of what violates due process. This balancing test is often criticized as having subsequently been used in a particularly subjective manner.
7274b5cab61d90f743a30c3175a6835a
Latta v. Otter Latta v. Otter is a case initiated in 2013 in U.S. federal court by plaintiffs seeking to prevent the state of Idaho from enforcing its ban on same-sex marriage. The plaintiffs won in U.S. District Court. The case was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard this together with two related cases–"Jackson v. Abercrombie", and "Sevcik v. Sandoval".
41d12b74aa2f1baf28a5071eca424b49
Dalton v. Specter Dalton v. Specter, 511 U.S. 462 (1994) , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that an Executive Order to shut down the Philadelphia Naval Base was not subject to judicial review. In an opinion written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the Court held that the decision to close the base was not subject to review under the Administrative Procedure Act because the decision to close the base did not constitute the final action of an agency. Additionally, the Court held that the decision to close the base, which was made pursuant to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, was not subject to judicial review because the 1990 Act "commits decisionmaking to the discretion of the President".
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.
e309a8945bc8cb963fcc8838aad8f1a4
Washington v. Davis Washington v. Davis, 426 US 229 (1976) was a United States Supreme Court case that established that laws that have a racially-discriminatory effect but were not adopted to advance a racially-discriminatory purpose are valid, under the US Constitution.
dd2628d0db1ad8785c4fd1cc476e372f
Wilson v. Omaha Tribe Wilson v. Omaha Tribe, 442 U.S. 653 (1979), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that in a land dispute, 25 U.S.C. § 194 applied only to individuals and not a state, that federal law governed the tribe's right to possession, but that state law was to be used in determining how that applied to the natural movement of a river's boundaries.
557f7bf288964d365c8bec7f18ca5d73
Doe v. Chao Doe v. Chao, 540 U.S. 614 (2004), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that interpreted the statutory damages provision of the Privacy Act of 1974.
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.
567bdcd0f7db100ade640678c349d653
Stoner v. California Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483 (1964) , is a United States Supreme Court decision involving the Fourth Amendment. It was a criminal case appealed from the California Courts of Appeal after the California Supreme Court denied review. The case extended the situations under which search warrants are required as they reversed a robbery conviction made on the basis of evidence obtained in violation of the holding.
a3683ab0a69dcf4c2325e714c1fe7d8f
Youngstown Sheet &amp; Tube Co. v. Sawyer Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) , also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the United States Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. It was a "stinging rebuff" to President Harry Truman.
8e7f4a159239c9c75ddd51629c293410
Ashwander rules The Ashwander rules, articulated by Justice Louis D. Brandeis, are a set of principles used by the United States Supreme Court for avoiding constitutional rulings.