The two Supreme Court cases Korematsu v. United States 1944 and Schenck v. United States 1919 are similar in how they deal with people who stood up for their rights and dealt with Constitutional Amendments but differ in their time periods and the amendments they deal with. Both of the cases took place during times of war, Schenck during World War I and Korematsu during World War II. Charles Schenck did not believe in the Conscription Act so he urged people to protest it through words and papers and when he was brought to court the main case issue was if his actions were protected by the First Amendment. Much like Schenck, Fred Korematsu did not agree with the Japanese Exclusion Act and refused to be removed from his home. When he was brought
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
US This Supreme Court case involved the argument of whether or not the government could restrict the 1st amendment or the freedom of speech of an individual if there is a clear and present danger to the country. Shortly after World War 1 began the government passed the espionage act, which made it illegal to say or distribute anything that was seen as harmful to the United States war effort. Charles Schenck was the Secretary of the US socialist party. Schenk was strongly opposed to the military draft because he believed this was a violation of the 13th amendment, Schenck argued that underneath the newly adopted draft that the american people were being forced into involuntary servitude or as he viewed it slavery.
The case of wickard v filburn was about a was a small farmer in the state of Ohio who decides to grow extra wheat for his personal use and to feed his livestock. He got in trouble with the law because he grew too much wheat now can you believe that. Mr.filburn decides to take the situation to the supreme court wondering why or what did he do to get in trouble for harvested nearly 12 acres of wheat, the supreme court penalized him although he argued for his rights along with asking what he did wrong.
First, it was acknowledged that every individual is protected against losing their citizenship according to the Fourteenth Amendment, in Afroyim v. Rusk. That the Constitution requires, “clear and convincing evidence” that citizenship was voluntary denounced, which Congress does not have the power to constitute the standard of. Secondly, the court recognized that even though in the case of Nishikawa v. Dulles it was ruled that Congress does have the right to supply the standard of evidential proof; the case was not a fair decision based on the Constitution. Proof was left to Terrazas to show that he did not mean to denounce his citizenship.
Plessy v Fergusen was yet another court case where “separate but equal” was not implementing equality. It showed that they still thought of Black men and women as being less and not deserving the same rights as the White men. Homer Plessy was a free man, that was mainly White and because of a percentage he had of being Black he was treated as a Black man. He tried to sit in the train car of the White men and much like Rosa Parks was asked to go to the back where the Black men belonged in a different car. This case resulted in the Supreme Court defending the decision of the East Louisiana Railroad stating that they weren't violating any law by the ruling they had.
There have been many famous court trials throughout history. The Dred Scott v. Stanford Court Case of 1857, also known as the “Dred scott case”, was one of these historic court trials. This court case led to the United states supreme Court decision on the US labor law and constitutional law. It revolved around the matter of Negroes whose ancestors that were imported into the United States, and were put into slavery. The Supreme ruled that whether enslaved or free, Blacks could not be an American citizen, could not sue in federal court, and the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in the federal territories acquired.
One example of freedom of expression being contested in a court of law was the Pickering v. Board of Education case Where the U.S. Supreme Court held that in the absence of proof of the teacher knowingly or recklessly making false statements, the teacher had a right to speak on issues of public importance without being terminated from his position.
It also made it illegal to try to “[obstruct the] production in support of war efforts.” In addition to avoid internal conflicts during war time, the bill was passed as a response of fear to the rise of communism overseas. A U.S. Supreme Court case, Schenck v. United States, which concluded with the Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. stating that the actions of Schenck, who was passing anti-draft pamphlets to young men, that his actions would intend the crime of sedition and created a “clear and present danger.” This also led to the standard of the bad tendency test in which the inclination of the speech was to promote an illegal action. In 1951 shortly after the World War II, several Communists were tried by the United State Supreme Court.
Fred Korematsu was Japanese born American who was affected by the order. He decided to file a case opposing the rule, stating that it was unconstitutional. The court case Korematsu v. United States became one of the most controversial cases during WWII. Later, Korematsu was jailed and proclaimed that, "I didn't feel guilty because I didn't do anything wrong... Every day in school, we said the pledge of the flag, 'with liberty and justice for all,' and I believed all that.
To clarify, although Holmes quarrels that the Supreme Court was right in their decision to arrest Schenck whom, “…as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive of evils that Congress has the right to prevent.” In contrast, this decision violates the 13th Amendment since Schenck was not presenting an harm or danger. But, however, his actions were, “…more like someone shouting, not falsly, but truly…” In a sense, the Supreme Court was incorrect in their decision; therefore, U.S. citizens have the right to protest during times of
Brown vs the Board of Education There are many historical events that have changed how our world works today. The event that I believe was the most important is the Brown v. the Board of Education legal case. It not only helped shape modern education, but it was also the cornerstone of many civil rights movements. From the late 1800s to the mid-1900s, racial segregation was something that was prominent in society.
The case on a man of the name Gregory Lee Johnson. He was a protester and during a protest to get people to notice he, knowing it would cause an uprise, set an american flag aflame. This lead to the state of texas to harshly criticize the man and to go the the extent of sueing him. The case by the name Texas v.s. Johnson was a case that was taken to the supreme court, in which they made the ruling that Johnson was using and was protected under the rights of the first amendment through expression. The state took this with a grain of salt as they did not agree with this decision.
Hugo Black was a part of the majority opinion and said lock up Korematsu. Hugo Black said to lock up Korematsu because the US was at war with Japan and he did not want to take a chance of terrorist attacks. Another reason to lock up Korematsu stated by Hugo Black was it was recommended by the US military to keep the US safe. The Concurring Opinion is when a justice agrees with the Majority Opinion but for a different reason. Felix Frankfurter’s opinion was to lock Korematsu up and his opinion was concurring because there was nothing in the Constitution that said you could not lock up Japanese
One case that happen was called the Engel vs. Vitale (1962). This case was about how a student parent sued The Board of Regents. From this case the board had written a prayer were students would recite every day. The parent Engel argued that this was prayer was unconstitutional because it was written by the government officials. It was also mentioned how this prayer violated the Establishment Clause.
Arguably the most significant civil rights activist in American history, led the boycott to victory. Consequently, the U.S. Supreme Court declared racial segregation for public transportation as unconstitutional. Here by, "***INSERT LAW -QUOTED**** BROWDER VS GALE 1956