Argued Date: Feb 28, 1819; Feb 23, 1819; Feb 24, 1819; Feb 25, 1819; Feb 26, 1819; Feb 27, 1819; Mar 1, 1819; Mar 2, 1819; Mar 3, 1819
Decided Date: Mar 6, 1819
Summary of the Facts of the Case: Maryland passed legislation to tax banks. McCulloch refused to pay tax.
Questions: (1) Did Congress have the authority to establish the bank? (2) Did the Maryland law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers?
How the vote turned out: 6 for; 1 against
Summary of Conclusion: States have power to tax but the constitution holds supreme power and the states cannot tax those they are controlled by/ Congress has the power to incorporate the back and Maryland could not tax instruments of the national government
Petitioner: Jane Roe
Respondent: Henry Wade
Argued Date: Dec 13, 197, Oct 11, 1972
Decided Date: Jan 22, 1973
Summary of the Facts of the Case: Jane Roe (fake name) filed a lawsuit against DA of Dallas County, Texas challenging a law making abortion illegal except by a doctor's orders to save a woman's life. Roe alleged that the state laws were unconstitutionally vague and abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
Questions: Does the Constitution recognize a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?
How the Vote Turned Out: 7 for; 2 against
Summary of Conclusion: 14 amendment and gov.' interest in protecting potential human life must be balanced. A woman can decide whether or not to have an abortion during the first trimester. In the second trimester, the state can place regulations that are reasonable in terms of maternal health. In the third trimester, when the fetus reaches viability, the state can regulate or prohibit abortions altogether.
Petitioner: Oliver Brown, Mrs. Richard Lawton, Mrs. Sadie Emmanuel
Respondent: Board of Education of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas
Argued Date: Dec 9-11, 1952, Dec 7-9, 1953
Decided Date: May 17, 1954
Summary of the Facts of the Case: This case was the consolidation of cases arising in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, and Washington D.C.Black students were denied entry to certain schools. They argued that such segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were denied relief in the lower courts based on Plessy v. Ferguson, which held that racially segregated public facilities were legal so long as the facilities for blacks and whites were equal.
Questions: Does the segregation of public education based solely on race violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
How the vote turned out: 9 for; 0 against
Summary of Conclusion: Court ruled unanimously that racial segregation in public schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The 1954 decision declared that separate educational facilities for white and African American students were inherently unequal.