WARREN COURT” LEGAL DECISIONS (1957-1968) Amanda Figura

By alf1425
  • Roth v. United States, 1957

    Roth v. United States, 1957
    Under the common law rule that prevailed before Roth, articulated most famously in the 1868 English case Hicklin v. Regina, any material that tended to "deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences" was deemed "obscene" and could be banned on that basis. Thus, works by Balzac, Flaubert, James Joyce and D. H. Lawrence were banned based on isolated passages and the effect they might have on children. Samuel Roth, who ran a literary business in New York City, was convi
  • Period: to

    FAMOUS “WARREN COURT” LEGAL DECISIONS 1957-1968

  • Mapp v. Ohio, 1961

    Mapp v. Ohio, 1961
    All evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Federal Constitution is inadmissible in a criminal trial in a state court. Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25, overruled insofar as it holds to the contrary. Pp. 643-660.
  • Baker v. Carr, 1962

    Baker v. Carr, 1962
    Charles W. Baker and other Tennessee citizens alleged that a 1901 law designed to apportion the seats for the state's General Assembly was virtually ignored. Baker's suit detailed how Tennessee's reapportionment efforts ignored significant economic growth and population shifts within the state.
  • Engel v. Vitale, 1962

    Engel v. Vitale, 1962
    Arguments were made on April 3rd, 1962. On June 25, 1962, the Supreme Court ruled 7 to 1 that it was unconstitutional for a government agency like a school or government agents like public school employees to require students to recite prayers. In his majority opinion, Justice Black sided substantially with the arguments of the separationists, who quoted heavily from Thomas Jefferson and made extensive use of his “wall of separation” metaphor. Particular emphasis was placed upon James Madison’
  • Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964

    Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964
    Danny Escobedo's brother-in-law was killed on January 19, 1960. At about 2:30 in the morning, Escobedo was arrested without a warrant and taken to the Chicago police headquarters for questioning. Escobedo made no statement to the police and was released at approximately 5:00 that afternoon, after his lawyer obtained a writ of habeas corpus. Ten days later, on January 30, Escobedo was again arrested, handcuffed, and driven to the police station. On the way to the sta tion, the police alleged
  • Reynolds v. Sims, 1964

    Reynolds v. Sims, 1964
    Charging that malapportionment of the Alabama Legislature deprived them and others similarly situated of rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Alabama Constitution, voters in several Alabama counties brought suit against various officials having state election duties. Complainants sought a declaration that the existing state legislative apportionment provisions were unconstitutional; an injunction against future elections pending reapportionment in accordan
  • Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965

    Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965
    was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Constitution protected a right to privacy. The case involved a Connecticut law that prohibited the use of contraceptives. By a vote of 7–2, the Supreme Court invalidated the law on the grounds that it violated the "right to marital privacy". Although the Bill of Rights does not explicitly mention "privacy," Justice William O. Douglas wrote for the majority that the right was to be found in the "penumbras" and "em
  • Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

    With its decisions in the cases of Mapp v. Ohio, 1961, Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963, and Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964, the Warren Court handed down the bases of what it called the “fundamentals of fairness” standard. At both the State and federal level, the Court sent a clear signal to law enforcement and criminal justice officials. Convictions not made in conformity with the “fairness” standard would likely be overturned. Constitutional guarantees of due process for the accused had to be upheld.
  • Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963

    Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963
    Clarence Gideon, a man in Florida, was charged with breaking into a pool hall and taking money from vending machines there. In Florida, this was considered a felony. At his hearing, Gideon asked that the court appoint a lawyer to represent him since he could not afford one. The court denied him this, noting a Florida law which allowed counsel only in capital-offense cases. Gideon went to trial and did the best he could, defending himself, but was found guilty and sentenced to five years in jail.