SUPREME COURT CASES

U.S. v. NixonBush v. GoreGideon vs. Wainwright

Words to know

“Bug”- A covert listening device, is usually a combination of a miniature radio transmitter with a microphone.

Administrative Law- law that inspects any event where the U.S. Federal Government involves its citizens with matters involving the administration of government programs, the establishments of regulatory federal standards or the creation of agencies.

Instructions Create a word map for each of the

cases discussed.

Case Name

Issue Argument & Amendments

Ruling Significance/Importance

U.S. v. Nixon (1974) : Issue

In 1972, President Richard Nixon, a Republican, was running for reelection against Senator George McGovern, a Democrat. Five months before the election, a security guard found burglars in the Democratic Party headquarters, located in Washington D.C.’s Watergate apartment complex. Reporters following the story connected the burglars to high-ranking officials in the White House. Nixon denied any connection to the break-in. However, a Congressional investigation revealed the existence of audiotapes of the President discussing the break-in with its organizers, his advisors. Nixon refused to turn the tapes over to Congress.

U.S. v. Nixon (1974) : ArgumentPresident Nixon claimed the tapes were covered by "executive privilege“, or the right the President has to privileged communication that could not be looked at by any other branch of the government. The District Court ruled against Nixon. The President appealed and the case quickly reached the Supreme Court.

U.S. v. Nixon (1974) : RulingThe Supreme Court decided unanimously that Nixon must hand over the tapes. As for "executive privilege," the Court acknowledged that the President had a right to privileged communication where certain areas of national security were concerned. However, the Court stated that this case did not meet those conditions. Furthermore, the Court declared that no president is above the law.• What is the term when even the President has to follow the laws?

U.S. v. Nixon (1974) : SignificanceNixon handed over the tapes that revealed that he had personally engaged in the cover-up of the burglary. Within a few days, Congress began impeachment proceedings against the President for his actions. Rather than face the impeachment hearings, Nixon resigned from office, the 1st time a President has done so in U.S. history.

Bush v. Gore (2000) : Background

Many people went to bed election night thinking that Al Gore had won, only to discover in the morning that George W. Bush had been declared the winner. The election was too close to call, and in the end it came down to one state: Florida, where Bush's younger brother, Jeb, was governor.

Bush v. Gore (2000) : The IssueOn December 8th of 2000, a local court in the state of Florida forced the city of Palm Beach to manually recount almost 10,000 ballots because the voters in had problems with the state’s electronic voting machines. To make matters worse, many ballots were not properly punched; resulting in unclear votes.

After losing the state of Florida and ultimately the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore petitioned that the ballots be recounted in a formal case, filed before the Circuit Court of Florida. After this filing a manual recount was ordered.

Bush v. Gore (2000) : Argument

George W. Bush explained that the manual recount undermined the 14th Amendment ‘s equal protection clause, he believed that the recount violated the American presidential election system, and finally, that the recount violated the preservation of equality and uniformity that existed within the administrative system.

Bush v. Gore (2000) : Ruling

The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of George Bush, finding that the state of Florida violated the 14th Amendment by enacting a recounting procedure. Specifically, the recounting procedure violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment (requires the federal government to respect, maintain and uphold the legal rights of American citizens).

Bush v. Gore (2000) : SignificanceGovernments in the United States are not allowed to infringe on the civil rights and liberties of its people.

Cartoon Cases

Words to know

The writ of habeas corpus serves as an important check on the manner in which state courts pay respect to federal constitutional rights. A writ of habeas corpus is a judicial mandate to a prison official ordering that an inmate be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he should be released from custody.

Gideon vs Wainwright: Issue In 1962, Clarence Gideon was charged in

a Florida state court for a felony crime of breaking into a pool hall with the intent to commit a misdemeanor. When he appeared in court without a lawyer and asked the court to provide him with one, the court denied stating that only defendants charged with capital crimes may be provided with an attorney. Gideon represented himself, was found guilty, and was sentenced to 5 years in prison.

Argument

Gideon filed a habeas corpus petition in the Florida State Court and argued that the trial court’s decision violated his constitutional right to be represented by counsel. The Florida Supreme Court denied habeas corpus relief.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court held that the framers of the Constitution placed a high value on the right of the accused to have the means to put up a proper defense, and the state as well as federal courts must respect that right. The Court held that it was consistent with the Constitution to require state courts to appoint attorneys for defendants who could not afford to retain counsel on their own.

Significance

The Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to a watered-down version of the Bill of Rights to the states. Federal rights apply to the states just like the would at the federal level.