Civil Rights Cases
Brown v. Board of Education Topeka Kansas (1954)
"We conclude that the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."
Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools (1992)
The Supreme Court ruled that students who are subjected to sexual harassment in public schools may sue their boards for monetary damages under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. It's important because it was the first case wherein the Supreme Court upheld an award of monetary damages under Title IX. Six years later, the Supreme Court was called upon to delimit the circumstances for such damages to be recovered in Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District (1998)
U.S vs. Virginia (1996)
Virginia Military Institute (VMI) was the only single-sexed school in Virginia. VMI used a highly adversarial method to train (male) leaders of the future. There was no equal educational opportunity to that of VMI in the State for women. -Gender-based classifications of the government can be defended only by exceedingly persuasive justifications. The State must show that its classification serves important governmental objectives and that the means employed are substantially related to those objectives. The justification must be genuine, not hypothesized. And it must not rely on overbroad generalizations about the differences between males and females.
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
a white Michigan resident with a 3.8 grade average and 161 LSAT score, was denied admission to the University of Michigan Law School (Defendant), she sued the latter in federal district court, alleging racial discrimination against her in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment on the basis of the law school's (Defendant) direct consideration of race as a factor in the admissions process -Diversity is a compelling interest that can justify the narrowly tailored use of race when public universities select applicants for admission.
Bakke v. University of California (1978)
a white applicant to the University of California, Davis Medical School, sued the University, alleging his denial of admission on racial grounds was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution (Constitution). -Although race may be a factor in determining admission to public educational institutions, it may not be a sole determining factor.
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held in a 5-4 decision that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[
Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder (2013)
is a landmark United States Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of two provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: Section 5, which requires certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices; and Section 4(b), which contains the coverage formula that determines which jurisdictions are subjected to preclearance based on their histories of discrimination in voting.
United States v. Windsor (2013)
is a landmark civil rights case[1][2][3] in which the United States Supreme Court held that restricting U.S. federal interpretation of "marriage" and "spouse" to apply only to heterosexual unions, by Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), is unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment; Justice Kennedy wrote: "The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity."[4]
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of a Louisiana law passed in 1890 "providing for separate railway carriages for the white and colored races." The law, which required that all passenger railways provide separate cars for blacks and whites, stipulated that the cars be equal in facilities, banned whites from sitting in black cars and blacks in white cars (with exception to "nurses attending children of the other race"), and penalized passengers or railway employees for violating its terms.
Mendez v. Westminster (1945)
was a 1947 federal court case that challenged racial segregation in Orange County, California schools. In its ruling, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in an en banc decision, held that the segregation of Mexican and Mexican American students into separate "Mexican schools" was unconstitutional. It was the first ruling in the United States in favor of desegregation.
Arizona v. United States (2012)
was a United States Supreme Court case involving Arizona's Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act. At issue is whether the law usurps the federal government's authority to regulate immigration laws and enforcement. The Court ruled that sections 3, 5(C), and 6 of S. B. 1070 were preempted by federal law, but left other parts of the law intact, including a provision that allowed law enforcement to investigate a person's immigration status.
Corpus Christi ISD v. Cisneros (1971)
was a desegregation class action against a school district and its board of trustees. Statutorily mandated segregation in the education system was unconstitutional in the United States at that time. However, the federal courts were asked to decide whether segregation of children of a certain race without a statute mandating such segregation was also unconstitutional. The U.S. Court of Appeals declared that segregation of Mexican American children, whether on the basis of statute or not, is constitutionally impermissible. Thus, actions and policies of school authorities that deny students equal protection of the laws based on race or ethnicity are unlawful, it said, prescribing a series of remedies.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1854)
was a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, could not be American citizens and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court,[2][3] and that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in the federal territories acquired after the creation of the United States. Dred Scott, an enslaved African American man who had been taken by his owners to free states and territories, attempted to sue for his freedom. In a 7-2 decision written by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the Court denied Scott's request. For only the second time to that point in its history, the Supreme Court ruled an Act of Congress to be unconstitutional
Parents Involved v. Seattle (2007)
School plans that use race alone as a qualifying criterion for school assignments is unconstitutional
Romer v. Evans (1996)
Colorado voters adopted Amendment two to their State Constitution, precluding the government from adopting measures that would protect homosexuals from discrimination. The state trial court enjoined enforcement of the act. -A bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest.
Craig v. Boren (1976)
Oklahoma State maintained different drinking ages between men and women for the consumption of 3.2% alcohol beer. The Appellant, (Appellant), now alleges that this difference violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution (Constitution). -Gender-based classifications must satisfy intermediate scrutiny requirements to pass constitutional muster.
Reed v. Reed (1971)
The Petitioner, the mother of a deceased child (Petitioner), alleges a statute that prefers males over females in the administration of an estate to which they both have equal claims, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution (Constitution). - Classifications based on gender must be substantially related to an important government interest in order to be upheld per the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
