A slave sued his master for freedom after he had moved to a free state. His master convinced him to go to court because he wanted to use this case as a way of promoting abolition.
The Court ruled that the slave had no right to sue for freedom because due to the Fugitive Slave bill, even if he moved to a free state, he would have to be sent back to a slave state, therefore making him a slave forever. This case also led The Missouri Compromise to be declared unconstitutional.
President Jefferson refused to acknowledge the appointments made by his predecessor John Adams. A man went to court because he believed he had the right to be Justice of the Peace.
The Judiciary Act is declared unconstitutional and the Supreme Court could now assert its authority over the legislative and executive branches. Judicial Review is also established.
The state of Maryland brought a cashier in the Maryland branch of the Bank of the United States, to court for not paying a tax the state had imposed on the United States Bank.
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the federal government’s national bank was immune to state taxation. The Court decided that Congress could set up a United States Bank and write laws “necessary and proper” to carry out its constitutional power to coin and regulate money. From this case, the “necessary and proper” clause was established.
Two men who owned steamboat companies disputed over who had control of the Hudson River. One had rights from the NY State Government while the other had rights from US Congress.
Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that New York State did not have the right to regulate interstate commerce and only the US Congress has the right to do so. From this case, the Coastal Commerce Act of 1793 was enacted.
Two brothers sold lottery tickets from Washington D.C in Virginia, which violated Virginia State law. The State of Virginia took the brothers to court.
The Supreme Court agreed with the Virginia State Supreme Court and the brothers were convicted. This case helped to establish where the authority of the State in the court ends and where the Federal authority in the court begins.
An African American man was arrested for sitting in the “White” car of the train because in Louisiana, African Americans were required to ride in different cars.
The court decided that it was in fact illegal for the man to have sat in the “White” car. They based this off the fact that the segregated cars still provided “separate but equal” amenities for African Americans and Whites, and therefore did not breach the 'Equal Protection' clauses in the fourteenth amendment.
A girl went to court because she was forced to go to an all-black elementary school far away form her house, even though there was an all-white school closer to her house.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the young girl because they refused to apply the segregation laws in Kansas to public education. The Court felt that even if the facilities were physically equal, African American children still received an inferior education. Separate educational facilities were held to be “inherently unequal” and therefore the “separate but equal” doctrine was rejected in this case.
President Abraham Lincoln declared that civilians had to be tried in military courts, even in places where there were still functional civil courts.
The Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for the military court to have tried the man because he was a US citizen and deserved a trial in a civil court. The Court concluded that the laws and Constitution stated that this man, as with any other civilian, not be tried by a military tribunal if there is a civil court available instead.
The editor of the New York Weekly Journal was brought to court on charges of printing false and seditious statements about local officials.
Despite the judges’ orders, the jurors delivered a not guilty verdict. They ruled that even if what the man printed was false in context, all statements he made were in fact true and based off of clear facts, and therefore he did not abuse his freedom of the press, he simply printed the truth.
Ernesto Miranda was arrested and taken in for interrogation without being read his rights. After a while, the policemen had succeeded in getting a written confession signed by him.
The Supreme court ruled in favor of Ernesto Miranda. They said that suspects must be specifically read their rights before any sort of interrogation. These rights that are now routinely read after an arrest or before an interrogation are called the “Miranda Rights”.