Landmark Cases

Aims:

• To identify and explain the rulings and decisions that affect both government on a grand scale and the everyday life of US citizens
• To analyse the landmark cases of the Supreme Court and contemporary issues facing the judicial branch of government in the US today

What defines a landmark case?

Landmark decisions establish a significant new legal principle or concept or otherwise substantially change the interpretation of existing law. Such a decision may settle the law in more than one way:

• distinguishing a new principle that refines a prior principle, thus departing from prior practice without violating the rule of stare decisis;
• establishing a “test” or a measurable standard that can be applied by courts in future decisions.

In the United States, landmark court decisions come most frequently from the Supreme Court. United States courts of appeals may also make such decisions, particularly if the Supreme Court chooses not to review the case or if it adopts the holding of the lower court, such as in Smith v. Collin. Although many cases from state supreme courts are significant in developing the law of that state, only a few are so revolutionary that they announce standards that many other state courts then choose to follow.

Don’t forget about some of the other important cases:

1944 – Korematsu v. United States – The Court ruled Executive Order 9066, internment of Japanese citizens during World War II, is legal, 6-3 for the United States.

1961 – Mapp v. Ohio – “Fruit of the poisonous tree,” evidence obtained through an illegal search, cannot be used at trial, 6-3 for Mapp.

1967 – Loving v. Virginia – Prohibition against interracial marriage was ruled unconstitutional, 9-0 for Loving.

1968 – Terry v. Ohio – Stop and frisk, under certain circumstances, does not violate the Constitution. The Court upholds Terry’s conviction and rules 8-1 that it is not unconstitutional for police to stop and frisk individuals without probable cause for an arrest if they have a reasonable suspicion that a crime has or is about to occur.

2008 – District of Columbia v. Heller – The Second Amendment does protect the individual’s right to bear arms, 5-4 for Heller.

2010 – Citizens United v. FEC – The Court rules corporations can contribute to PACs under the First Amendment’s right to free speech, 5-4 for Citizens United.

Further Reading: Race and Rights in Contemporary US Politics (Pearson p397-401)