Overview of Amendments and ClausesEllen HwangMelissa BakerAlison HoMelissa Culhane

1st Amendment:includes the freedoms of religious

expression, speech, press, assembly, and petition. Freedom of religious expression prohibits the federal government from making a law "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Each citizen is entitled to believe and practice their own religion and the government is generally not allowed to interfere with that, but it is not absolute

- Reynolds vs. United States (1879): The first case to really examine this was Reynolds vs. United States in 1879. In the nineteenth century some members of the Mormon church practiced polygamy, despite a federal law banning it. The Supreme Court upheld the criminal conviction of one of these members practicing polygamy, overriding his claim that the first amendment protected his right to religious beliefs. This case defined the court’s stance that while people are definitely free to believe whatever they want, they cannot necessarily practice however they want. Especially where vampirism or sacrifices might come into play, the court protects people’s ability to believe in these things but not to act them out

-Engel vs. Vital (1962): The Supreme Court notably does not recognize the power of public schools/institutions to force prayer on students. In Engel vs. Vitale in 1962 it was declared unconstitutional for state officials to have an official school prayer and encourage its use in public schools. Basically, under the first amendment all citizens have every right to believe in their religion and support a religious cause, but cannot enforce it upon others or practice it if it is deemed harmful or inappropriate.

Melissa Culhane

1st Amendment (cont): The freedom of speech is your political

right to communicate your opinions and ideas. People’s thoughts cannot be censured and everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Democracies have long been struggling to decide if this broad right requires a limit at some point, and if so where to put it. There is no blanket rule where a person crosses a line and their right becomes void, but generally the freedom is not absolute and commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity, sedition, copyright violation, and revelation of classified information

- Schenck vs. United States (1919): In the Schenck vs. United States of 1919, Charles Schenck, secretary of the Socialist party of America, distributed anti-war pamphlets in opposition to the world war 1 draft. He claimed he was innocent under the first amendment but the court disagreed, establishing the clear and present danger doctrine to determine under what circumstances limits can be placed on First Amendment freedoms of speech, press or assembly

- Gitlow vs. New York (1925): The clear and present danger was also in effect in Gitlow vs. New York in 1925, where the first amendment’s protection did not stop Benjamin Gitlow from being arrested for publishing a document advocating the violent illegal overthrow of the government and breaking the Criminal Anarchy Law.

Melissa Culhane

1st Amendment (cont): Freedom of the

press or freedom of the media is the freedom of communication and expression through various channels, including media and published materials. Freedom of assembly is the individual right to come together and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests. Freedom of petition is the right to make a formal complaint to the government without fear of punishment

- Near vs. Minnesota (1931): Called the first great press case, Near vs Minnesota was the first court cases to deal with the boundaries of the freedom of the press aspect of the first amendment. Jay near was co-publisher of a scandalous newspaper that printed controversial things along the lines with yellow journalism, publicly bashing local officials and was taken to court. In a close vote the Supreme Court held that censorship is largely unconstitutional except in some cases and that Near was within his right to publish what he wanted. This case also strengthened the notion that a prior restraint of the press violates the First Amendment

- New York Times Co. vs. Sullivan (1964): In the midst of the civil rights movement, the New York Times Published a full page ad defending Martin Luther King, Jr and asking for funds to defend him against a perjury indictment. King was previously arrested in Alabama and the Times made false accusations against the Montgomery city officials, which public safety commissioner OL.B. Sullivan sued for because he claimed the inaccurate criticisms caused defamation for him and his position. The court sided unanimously with the Times, establishing the actual malice standard. Since there was no proof that the Times knowingly printed false information it was not considered slander and they were protected under the first amendment.

Melissa Culhane

2nd Amendment: gives the state the right to have a

militia and individuals the right to bear arms. In 1787, states were afraid of the federal government becoming too powerful. As a result, the court gave the states the power to have their own militias

- United States vs. Cruikshank (1876): The first case to help interpret the second amendment. The court recognized that the right to bear arms was already allowed by the people but was not stated in the Constitution. This case charged three conspiracy KKK members who tried to prevent blacks from having their civil rights, including the right to bear arms for legal intent. At this time, the court had only ruled that the second amendment allowed the states to maintain a militia. So, the court ruled that because the right to bear arms was not stated in the Constitution, and the second amendment could not be regulated or controlled by Congress, the federal government had no power to people who violated the amendment. Therefore, if someone were to violate the law, a person would have to look to the police power of their state.

- Presser vs. Illinois (1886): A man named Herman Presser was arrested for parading armed men around Illinois. He defended that being arrested for such was a violation of his second amendment. The court ruled that Presser had the right to bear arms independently from the second amendment, and if the state was to control and keep them from bearing arms, then the state would be interfering with the federal militia.

- United States vs. Miller (1939): This case applied the Second Amendment to a federal firearms statute. The Supreme Court decided that the second amendment was one that gave people the right to bear arms for when it is time to serve the state’s militia. To add, the case described the types of guns that were necessary and helpful in contributing to the militia. This took weapons such as a sawed-off shotgun was not one of the arms included in the second amendment because it would not efficient in a state’s militia. This case brought out the purpose of the second amendment for the people.

Ellen Hwang

4th Amendment: This amendment protects people

from unlawful searches and seizures. In addition,it requires investigators to obtain proper warrants with exact details of who, what,and where they will be searching.

Olmsted v. United States (1928):• Without judicial approval, federal agents installed wiretaps near RoyOlmstead's basement and near his house because Olmstead was a suspectedbootlegger. With the information acquired through the wiretapping, Olmsteadwas convicted for conspiracy to violate the National Prohibition Act byimporting, possessing, and selling illegal liquors.

• Katz v. United States (1967)• Federal agents wired a phone booth that was often used by Mr. Katz withlistening devices. Information attained from the listening devices was used inhis trial in which he was accused of illegally wagering information (betting). The lower

court ruled that this was not a search because it did not penetrate the phone booth walls, based on the ruling of Olmstead v. United States. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the listening devices violated Mr. Katz's privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Wiretapping counts as a search.

The Olmstead case ruled that a tap of a telephone did not violate the 4thamendment because it was neither a search nor seizure. There was no entry ofhouses or buildings to get this information. This ruling was then reversed with theKatz case. Justice John Harlan ruled that the 4th amendment pertains to protectionof individuals as well as particular places.

Melissa Baker

5th Amendment

- The fifth amendment protects people from abuse of the government during legal proceedings. It requires a grand jury indictment for prosecution of serious crimes, and a person can’t be prosecuted more than once for the same offense. It specifies that there can be no loss of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, which means people must have notice, an opportunity to be heard, and the right to defend themselves in an orderly proceeding (the government cannot make up rules as they go along). When people “plead the fifth” it means they are asserting their right to not incriminate themselves, so they have no compulsion to confess and testify against themselves.

- Miranda vs. Arizona: The case Miranda vs. Arizona greatly defined this amendment. Ernesto Miranda was arrested based on circumstantial evidence and was never informed of his right to remain silent or right to an attorney, and after being convicted the supreme court overturned his case because the arresting officers did not read him his rights. Now the Miranda warning is given to all those arrested, and their case is only admissible if they are told their Miranda rights and if they understood them.

Melissa Culhane

6th AmendmentOverview: Protects the rights of individuals charged with federal crimes to defend themselves in a court trial.

• Right to a speedy, public trial by an impartial jury. Authorities can't purposely hold a person for an unnecessarily long time while waiting for a trial.

• Trials must be conducted in public to assure that justice is carried out in the full view of the people.

• Person accused may ask to be tried by a judge alone.

• The accused may also ask to have his or her trial moved to another community-change of venue- when unfavorable publicity shows that the defendant cannot receive an impartial trial at the original location.

• Gives the accused the right to know the charges against them and the right to hear and question all witnesses against them while given the right to convince witnesses to appear at the trial and testify in their behalf.

• Have the right to be defended by a lawyer.

• Jury must hear witnesses and evidence on both sides before deciding the guilt or innocence of a person charged with a crime.

• Legal counsel must be provided to a defendant if he or she can't afford one.

Miranda v. Arizona(1966)- Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and sexual assault. He signed a written confession without being told before the questioning about protection against self-incrimination and his basic rights to counsel. The court used his confession and found him guilty(convicted for 20 years). The Chief Justice Earl Warren stated that convictions made without proper procedure informing the accused may be overturned- Miranda's conviction was overturned. *This case is why law enforcement officers have to read you your rights before you are taken into custody.

Gideon v. Wainwright(1963): Clarence Gideon was charged in a state court with breaking and entering. He didn't have enough money to hire a lawyer, and was denied when he asked to be provided with a legal counsel. He defended himself and was found guilty. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of counsel was a fundamental right, and therefore states were bound to it. Gideon was given the right to representation by a court-appointed attorney.

AlisonHo

Melissa Baker8th Amendment: This amendment enforces that

no excessive bail or fines be imposed on the criminal and that they shall not be inflicted with cruel or unusual punishments. Nothing or nobody has outlined what "cruel or unusual punishments" specifically means. Francis v. Webseber(1947)• Willie Francis was a 16-year-old black youth who was convicted of murder inLouisiana. He was sentenced to death by electrocution. The chair seemed tomalfunction and did not provide an electric current sufficient to kill Francis. Inthe time that the chair was being fixed, Francis looked for a way to get out ofhis second execution. They ruled that the attempting of a second executionafter the first one fails does not violate the 8th amendment's prohibition of crueland unusual punishment. It was just an unfortunate event that it did not kill himthe first time.• Salerno v. United States(1987)• Anthony Salerno, a member of the mafia, was caught violating the RacketeerInfuenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO Act) and was arrested. Hewas detained after being arrested. The government felt that he was a threatto the community and did not allow him to post bail. Salerno challenged thegovernment, saying that they violated his 8th amendment rights to post bail.The Court disagreed saying that it does not promise him the right to bail.• "Cruel and unusual punishment" is a term that is relative to the time period. TheFrancis v. Webseber case is an example how the death sentences back then werenormal but definitely "cruel and unusual" now. It would be considered torture. Inaddition, the 8th amendment states that no excessive bail or fines will be imposedon the criminal. This does not mean that they are promised the right to bail in everycase, as enforced in the Salerno v. United States case.

9th Amendment: protects the rights not explicitly

stated otherwise. It is supposed to ensure that just because the other amendments outline the rights the government cannot violate, it does not mean that there are rights that the government can infringe upon. Any right not enumerated is still retained by the people

- Griswold vs Connecticut (1965): a landmark case for the supreme court, it was the first case that protected a person's right to privacy, a right not otherwise stated in the bill of rights or other amendments. A dated and rarely enforced connecticut law banned the use and promotion of contraceptives, which Griswold and partner Buxton were guilty of as owners of a local Planned Parenthood. They were taken to court and fined for violating the state's restrictions, but the Supreme court defended them because people have a constitutional right to marital privacy protected by the ninth amendment

- Roe vs Wade (1973): The famed decision regarding abortions can be classified under the ninth amendment as a woman's right to make decisions for her own body and decide to have an abortion. The debate about abortion is ever present and has hardly been resolved, but there were compromises made with respect to the restrictions of a particular state, viability of the fetus and health of the mother/

Melissa Culhane

10th Amendment

Description: Excluding the powers prohibited by the constitution to the states, the powers the Consitution does not assign to the federal government is delegated to the states or the people. This amendments keeps the federal government from becoming too powerful

Court Cases: - New York vs. United States (1992): A federal program during this time was giving

states the choice to provide for radioactive waste disposal or “take title to the waste”. This implied and basically would force New York to follow up with the federal regulatory program. New York stated that Congress did not have this power to force these regulations because it was against the 10th amendment. As a result, the court held that the Constitution did not state that Congress could force a federal regulatory program with a “take title” provision.

Ellen Hwang

13th AmendmentOverview: Abolished Slavery and authorized Congress to pass legislation

implementing its abolition.• Prohibits the binding of a person to perform a personal service due to

debt.• Slavery or involuntary servitude except as a punishment of crime may not

be exercised in the United States.• Final piece in ending slavery in the United States.

Bailey v. Alabama (1911)- Alonzo Bailey was an African American from Alabama who agreed to work for the Riverside Company for one year for $12 per month with an advance of $15. He stopped working after a little over a month but never refunded the money. He was brought to court on a testimony that he stopped working, without cause, failed to repay the money advanced to him and that he was a Negro. The Court found that holding a person criminally liable for taking money for work not performed was outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment, because it required that person to work rather than be found guilty of a crime.

Alison Ho

14th AmendmentOverview: National Citizenship• Granted citizenship to all persons born in the United States. Therefore granting

citizenship to former slaves.• All citizens are entitled to equal protection of the laws.• States the number of Representatives will be determined based on the population

in the state. However, if any state denies the right to vote then the number of representatives will be reduced.

• Penalty for engaging in insurrection. People who have participated in insurrection or rebellion against America may not hold any position in government unless Congress removes the ban with 2/3 vote.

• Public debt of the United States, authorized by law, cannot be questioned.• The United States or individual states cannot pay off debts obtained in the aid of

insurrection or rebellion against the United States. These debts and claims will be held illegal and void and they will not be able to collect compensation.

• Due Process Clause-prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken to ensure fairness. Regardless of race, sex, religious beliefs and creed.

• Equal Protection Clause-requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction.

Alison Ho

14th Amendment(cont.)Brown v. Board of Education (1954)- Oliver Brown’s third grade daughter had to walk one mile to her black

school everyday even though there was a white school closer. His daughter was denied enrollment because she was black. The Court decided that segregation in public schools was unconstitutional because it denied equal protection.

Roe v. Wade (1973)- Jane Roe(Norma McCorvey) was a single pregnant mother in Texas who wished to end

her pregnancy with an abortion. She was denied the abortion because it was illegal under Texas law unless the mother’s life was threatened by the pregnancy. She stated that these laws were unconstitutional because they violated her right if personal privacy. The court ruled that a woman’s right to an abortion was protected under the fourteenth amendment(right to privacy). This ruling enabled women to have complete control over their pregnancy during the first trimester and defined other state policies regarding the second and third trimesters.

UC Regents v. Bakke (1978)- Allan Bakke, 35 year-old white male, was rejected twice by UC Davis’s Medical

School. His GPA and test scores were far superior to a decent majority of students that were admitted both years he was rejected. Research showed that admissions required 16 black students per 100 students each year. Bakke argued that his rejection was based solely on race. The Courts ruled that the UC Davis Medical School violated the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment and the Civil Rights Act. They ordered Bakke’s admission to the school.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)- Pennsylvania required informed consent of women, 24 hour waiting

period after finding out if they were pregnant, the informed consent of at least one parent if the woman was a minor, notification of the spouse, and reporting requirements for abortion facilities. 5 abortion clinics, one individual and a class of abortion clinic physicians wanted Pennsylvania to reject this law, stating that it went against the ruling of Roe v. Wade. The Court upheld all the provisions except for the spousal notification provision because it was viewed as unnecessary. The Court stated that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting the health of the woman and the life of the fetus which is why most of the provisions were kept.

Alison Ho

15th Amendment

Overview: Right to Vote

• The right to vote cannot be denied by the United States or individual states based on race, color, or previous conditions of servitude.

• Gave minority groups the right to vote when before they were denied the right because of literacy tests, white primaries, and poll taxes.

Alison Ho

16th Amendment: allows the Congress to put an

income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results. It exempts income taxes from the constitutional requirements regarding direct taxes and after income taxes on rents

- Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895): A case that had first set the precedent for the subject of the sixtheenth amendment and was eventually replaced by it. In the case it was decided that income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were ruled to be direct taxes. They were deemed unconstitutional because they violated the provision that direct taxes be apportioned. The decision was superseded in 1913 by the Sixteenth Amendment, and a separate holding about the taxation of interest income on certain bonds was overruled by the Supreme Court in 1988 in the case of South Carolina v. Baker

Melissa Culhane

17th Amendment

Overview: Direct Election of Senators

• Gave the power to the people of the state to vote for their Senator(two from each state, terms of 6 years, each Senator gets one vote).

• In the event of a Senate vacancy, the state must order an election to fill the vacancy.

• The state can give power to the governor to appoint someone to fill the Senate seat until an election can be held.

AlisonHo

19th Amendment

This amendment guarantees all American women the right to vote. No United States citizen will be denied the right to vote based on their sex.

Melissa Baker

20th Amendment: Divided into 6 sections:• Section 1 states that the term of the President and Vice President end on January 20th, and the terms of

Senators and Representatives end on January 3rd on the year the term is supposed to end.

o Purpose: to reduce time between Election Day and beginning of federal office terms. Before the President would not take office until March 4th and this caused government to become inefficient because the outgoing President would not be doing much and the incoming President could not deal with issues until he took office.

• Section 2 highlights that at least once per year, Congress should gather together at noon on January 3rd unless otherwise stated by law to be on a different day.

• Section 3 states that the Vice President would take the position of President if the President were to die. This section also adds that if a President has not been chosen by the beginning of his term or if the President fails to qualify as so, then the Vice President would still take the place of President. If neither the President nor Vice President qualifies for some reason, then Congress can legally declare someone to act as President until the President or Vice President does quality as such.

• Section 4 states that in the case of the death of a President, the House of Representatives would have the right to choose who could take his place. If the Vice President was to die, the Senate would have the right to choose a person to take his place.

• Section 5 was created to declare that when this article is ratified, Sections 1 and 2 would take action on October 15th.

• Section 6 states that this article cannot take action unless it has been approved by three-quarters of state legislatures as to becoming an amendment in the Constitution.

Ellen Hwang

22nd Amendment

Description: This amendment states that someone cannot be elected as President more than two times and the President can only hold two terms.

The Constitution of 1787 did not set any limits on the number of terms a President could serve. George Washington was well respected by the people and could have easily served as many terms as he wanted, but he chose to serve no more than two terms. Unlike Washington, FDR served a total of four terms until he died in office in 1945. The death of FDR made people begin to think that the two term limit was good for the country and it would probably not be good if a democracy let someone run the country for more than a decade. This amendment was greatly influenced by George Washington.

Ellen Hwang

24th AmendmentDescription: This amendment gives citizens the right to vote for any election or

primary of the President and Vice President, for the electors for the President or Vice President, and for any other position in Congress. This amendment makes sure that no person is denied the right to vote if he or she does not pay a poll tax or any other tax.

• This amendment was created because during the Jim Crow-era, southern states would make blacks pay a poll tax in order to prevent blacks from voting. The 24th amendment was passed during the civil rights movement and ratified by 38 states and later 3 more. There are still 6 states in the south that have not ratified it, but because the 24th amendment is now implemented into the Constitution, it gives any citizen the right to vote.

Court CasesHarman vs. Forssenius (1965): This was a Supreme Court case that ruled that

Virginia violated the 24th amendment because the state created a law that partially eliminated their poll tax. Virginia attempted to only allow the poll tax to be waived if the person who planned on voting filled out a certificate of residency six months before the election. As a result of the case, Virginia was forced to get rid of their law and every citizen would be given the right to vote.

Ellen Hwang

25th AmendmentDescription: This amendment deals with the succession of the President, and

provides procedures for filling a vacancy in the Vice President office as well responding to Presidential disabilities. The Vice President will become President if the President dies or resigns. The President will nominate a Vice President, if there is a vacancy, who will be confirmed upon a majority vote of both Houses of Congress. Also, if the President declares that he is unable to carry out his powers and duties, the

Vice President will become the Acting President and carry out those roles. If the President then wants to come back, the Acting President and 2/3s vote of both Houses can overrule his decision to come back if they see him as unfit to carry out his duties as President.

• This amendment allowed President Ronald Reagan to step down while under goinga colonoscopy. A pre-cancerous lesion was discovered and Reagan chose to undergo surgery immediately instead of a couple weeks later. After talking to him White House counsel about it, Reagan chose to transfer his power under the 25th amendment. He thought that it was in the best interest of the country if he were to give over his roles while being hospitalized. He then transferred his powers to George H. W. Bush and made it clear to not bind his successor as President.

Melissa Baker

26th Amendment

This amendment makes it legal for every United States citizen 18 and over to vote. Their right to vote will not be denied based on age by the United States or by any state. The Congress will have the power to enforce this.

Melissa Baker

Advice and ConsentDescription: This clause allows the US Senate the right to advise and approve

treaties signed by the President and federal positions, such as Supreme Court judges, ambassadors, or Cabinet secretaries, appointed by the President. For a treaty, to be approved, the President must get two-thirds of consent from the Senate. The Founding Fathers were always afraid of authoritarian control, so the clause reassured that there is a balance in power.

Court Case: Myers vs. United States (1926): A first-class postmaster named Frank Myers was

removed from office by President Woodrow Wilson in 1920. Myer stated that President Wilson violated the 1876 federal law stating that postmasters were appointed and removed by the President only if it was advised and consented by the Senate. Though Myers’s statement of the statute was true, the court found that it was unconstitutional because it did not reassure separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. This case ruled that the President had the right to remove executive officers without the consent of any legislative body.

Ellen Hwang

Commerce ClauseDescription: This clause gives Congress the enumerated power "To regulate Commerce with

foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes". "Commerce" has many interpretations and gives the Supreme Court great flexibility in deciding cases involving the Commerce Clause in addition to great power to influence the balance of state and federal power.

• This clause does not only give Congress the power to regulate commerce amongthe states but how they carry out their interstate commerce too. The Hicklin v.Orbeck case made it illegal for states to favor their own residents when dealingwith interstate commerce. So Congress can virtually use the Commerce Clause tochange anything that has to do with interstate commerce. But sometimes, like inthe Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida ca, an ingress tries to stretch its power toregulate commerce too far and ends of falling short.

Court CasesHicklin v. Orbeck(1978)Alaska passed the Alaska Hire statute that required that Alaskan residents be hired before non-residents for jobs related to the oil and gas industry. They thought that this would help the economy in Alaska. The Supreme account deemed the law unconstitutional, saying that the Commerce Clause prohibits states from preferring their own residents in using natural resources found in the state but bound for interstate commerce.Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida (1996)The Seminole Tribe wanted to gamble on their reservation and requested that Florida enter into a negotiation under the

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. This Act required states to negotiate with Indian tribes regarding their gaming. Since Florida refused, the Seminoles were allowed to sue under the Act. When they tried to sue Florida, Congress intervened and tried to make Florida enter the negotiation by ending the state's immunity from civil suits under the Indian Commerce Clause. In the end, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress does not have the authority to end state sovereign immunity.

Melissa Baker

Elastic ClauseElastic Clause(Necessary and Proper Clause): Congress has the power to

make all laws that are necessary and proper for carrying out its powers( make laws that they deem necessary).

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Maryland passed a law stating that any bank not directly chartered by the state congress would have to pay extra taxes(their attempt to close the US National Bank in Baltimore). James McCulloch, a cashier at the bank, refused to pay the tax and was sued by Maryland because the state believed it had the power to tax any business within the state and because the Constitution had nothing stated about the power of creating a National Bank. He lost and was forced to pay the fine. The Supreme Court overturned the decision because the government had implied rights that were not stated in the Constitution. The creation of a bank was “necessary and proper” for establishing the legitimacy of the national government, which means that taxing the bank was against congressional powers. They also came to the conclusion that the government had the power to incorporate a national bank and that taxing parts of the national government interfered with the execution of constitutional power.

Example: If too few people sign up/volunteer for the Army or Navy, Congress has the power to draft people.

AlisonHo

Supremacy ClauseOverview: Assures that the Constitution and federal laws and treaties take

priority over state law; it also binds all judges to adhere to that principle in court. No state law or state Constitution may conflict with any form of national government.

Ware v. Hylton (1796): Virginia passed a law during the Revolutionary War that allowed the state to seize debt payments by their citizens to British creditors. The Supreme Court found this law to be inconsistent with the Treaty of Paris with Britain(protected the rights of British creditors). The Court used the Supremacy Clause to decided that the Treaty superseded the Virginia law and that it was the duty of the courts to declare the Virginia law ‘null and void.’

Cooper v. Aaron (1956): Arkansas wanted to nullify the Court’s school desegregation

decision in the Brown v. Board of Education case. The state acted on the states’ rights and adopted several statutes designed to nullify the desegregation ruling. The Supreme Court rejected the state's attempt stating the federal law controlled the ruling and that it could not be nullified by state laws or officials(relied on the Supremacy Clause to enforce this).

Alison Ho

Establishment Clause-The establishment clause goes along with the first amendment, which along

with the free exercise clause prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress or the preference of one religion over another. The second part is called the accommodation interpretation, and it prohibits Congress from preferring one religion over another, but does not prohibit the government's entry into religious territory to make adjustments in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause

- Lemon vs, Kurtzman (1971): ruled that Pennsylvania's 1968 Nonpublic Elementary and Secondary Education Act allowing the state superintendent of schools to reimburse nonpublic schools (mostly catholic)for the salaries of teachers who taught non religious material in these nonpublic schools violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. This court decison established the Lemon Test for all future cases: to be contstitutional the governments action must have nonreligious legislative purposes, it cannot either advance or inhibit religion, and government action cannot result in excessive entanglement into religious territory

Melissa Culhane

Full Faith & Credit Clause

- Says that states have to play nice with one another and respect decsions made in other states; meant to unify the new country while preserving the autonomy of the states

-Until the Supreme Court struck down all laws banning interracial marriage in 1967, a number of states banned interracial marriage and did not accept interracial marriage certificates issued in other states. The full faith and credit clause was never used to force a state to recognize a marriage it did not wish to recognize. It happens now with gay marriages, some being legal in some states and illegal in others, and with marijuana, having been decided to be legal in Colorado and illegal elsewhere

Melissa Culhane