https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/Recent content in Constitutional Law II: Rights on Teddy Rook Bookhttps://teddyrookbook.com/img/share.jpghttps://teddyrookbook.com/img/share.jpgHugoenhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/barron/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/barron/In Barron v. Baltimore (1833) Chief Justice Marshall held that the Bill of Rights limited only the federal government, so Baltimore owed no just compensation under the Fifth Amendment for ruining a wharf. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/slaughter-house/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/slaughter-house/In the Slaughter-House Cases (1873), 5 to 4, the Court read the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause narrowly, covering only rights of national citizenship, which left that clause largely unused (Saenz v. Roe, 1999, is a rare exception). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/incorporation/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/incorporation/Through the Due Process Clause the Court has applied most Bill of Rights guarantees to the states, asking whether a right is fundamental to "our scheme of ordered liberty" and "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition" (Duncan v. Louisiana, 1968; McDonald v. Chicago, 2010; Timbs v. Indiana, 2019; Ramos v. Louisiana, 2020). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/state-action/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/state-action/The Fourteenth Amendment limits states, not private persons (the Civil Rights Cases, 1883); private conduct counts as state action when it performs a traditional public function (Marsh v. Alabama, 1946), when courts enforce it (Shelley v. Kraemer, 1948) or when the state is entangled with it (Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority, 1961). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/procedural-due-process/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/procedural-due-process/When government deprives a person of a protected life, liberty or property interest (Board of Regents v. Roth, 1972), it must give fair procedure; Goldberg v. Kelly (1970) required a hearing before welfare benefits end, and Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) weighs the private interest, the risk of error and the government's interest. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/lochner-era/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/lochner-era/In Lochner v. New York (1905), 5 to 4, the Court struck down a maximum-hours law for bakers as violating liberty of contract; Justice Holmes's dissent said the Constitution "does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics"; the Court upheld some laws (Muller v. Oregon, 1908) and struck down others (Adkins, 1923). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/end-of-lochner/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/end-of-lochner/Nebbia v. New York (1934) and West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937), which overruled Adkins, ended close review of economic regulation; since then such laws get rational basis review. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/sdp-methods/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/sdp-methods/Washington v. Glucksberg (1997) asks for a "careful description" of the asserted right and whether it is deeply rooted in the Nation's history and tradition; another approach, from Justice Harlan's dissent in Poe v. Ullman (1961) and used in Obergefell (2015), treats tradition as a living one and reasons from principle. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/family-autonomy/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/family-autonomy/The Court has protected parents' rights to direct their children's upbringing (Meyer v. Nebraska, 1923; Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 1925; Troxel v. Granville, 2000), extended family living together (Moore v. East Cleveland, 1977) and married couples' use of contraceptives (Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/abortion-cases/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/abortion-cases/Roe v. Wade (1973) held that due process protects a right to choose abortion, with a trimester framework; Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) kept Roe's central holding and adopted an "undue burden" test; the Court overruled both in 2022. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/liberty-and-marriage/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/liberty-and-marriage/Loving v. Virginia (1967) struck down bans on interracial marriage; Lawrence v. Texas (2003) struck down a state law criminalizing private conduct between consenting adults of the same sex, overruling Bowers v. Hardwick (1986); Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) held same-sex couples may marry; Cruzan (1990) and Glucksberg (1997) addressed refusing medical treatment and assisted suicide. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/ep-framework/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/ep-framework/Equal protection analysis asks what classification a law makes and then applies the matching tier; the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause imposes the same requirement on the federal government (Bolling v. Sharpe, 1954). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/ep-rational-basis/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/ep-rational-basis/Most classifications get rational basis review and are upheld (Railway Express Agency v. New York, 1949); a few laws have failed it when they rested on animus or irrational prejudice (City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, 1985; Romer v. Evans, 1996). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/race-strict-scrutiny/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/race-strict-scrutiny/Racial classifications get strict scrutiny: Strauder v. West Virginia (1880) struck down excluding Black men from juries; Korematsu (1944) upheld the wartime exclusion order and has since been repudiated; Loving (1967) struck down interracial marriage bans. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/plessy-to-brown/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/plessy-to-brown/Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) upheld "separate but equal"; the NAACP's cases (Missouri ex rel. Gaines, 1938; Sweatt v. Painter, 1950) found separate graduate schools unequal; Brown v. Board of Education (1954), unanimous, held separate schools "inherently unequal," and Brown II (1955) ordered desegregation "with all deliberate speed." Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/discriminatory-purpose/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/discriminatory-purpose/A law neutral on its face violates equal protection only if adopted with discriminatory purpose (Washington v. Davis, 1976; Arlington Heights, 1977, listing evidence of purpose); a disparate impact alone is not enough, though some statutes reach impact; Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) struck down discriminatory enforcement. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/affirmative-action/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/affirmative-action/Regents v. Bakke (1978) barred quotas but allowed race as one factor; Croson (1989) and Adarand (1995) applied strict scrutiny to all racial classifications, including remedial ones; Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) upheld a holistic program and Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) struck down automatic points; the Court rejected race-conscious admissions programs in 2023. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/sex-discrimination/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/sex-discrimination/Reed v. Reed (1971) struck down a preference for men as estate administrators; Frontiero (1973) drew a plurality for strict scrutiny; Craig v. Boren (1976) set intermediate scrutiny; United States v. Virginia (1996) required an "exceedingly persuasive justification" to exclude women from VMI. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/other-classifications/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/other-classifications/State laws discriminating against lawfully present noncitizens usually get strict scrutiny (Graham v. Richardson, 1971); classifications by legitimacy get intermediate scrutiny; age (Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia, 1976), wealth (San Antonio v. Rodriguez, 1973) and disability (Cleburne) get rational basis. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/ep-fundamental-rights/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/ep-fundamental-rights/Laws burdening fundamental rights unequally get strict scrutiny: Reynolds v. Sims (1964) required "one person, one vote" for state legislatures; Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966) struck down poll taxes in state elections; Shapiro v. Thompson (1969) and Saenz v. Roe (1999) protected the right to travel; Bush v. Gore (2000) ended the Florida recount. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/clear-present-danger/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/clear-present-danger/Schenck v. United States (1919) upheld convictions for antidraft leaflets under a "clear and present danger" test; Holmes's dissent in Abrams (1919) and Brandeis's concurrence in Whitney (1927) argued for a narrower test; Dennis v. United States (1951) upheld Communist Party leaders' convictions. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/brandenburg/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/brandenburg/Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) held that the government may not punish advocacy of force or lawbreaking unless it is directed to inciting imminent lawless action and is likely to produce it; it overruled Whitney. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/content-based/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/content-based/Laws that regulate speech because of its subject or message are content-based and get strict scrutiny (Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 2015); content-neutral laws get intermediate scrutiny; viewpoint discrimination is the most suspect of all. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/unprotected-categories/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/unprotected-categories/A few narrow categories get little or no protection: incitement, true threats (Virginia v. Black, 2003), fighting words (Chaplinsky, 1942), obscenity (Miller v. California, 1973), defamation and fraud; the Court has refused to add new categories (United States v. Stevens, 2010). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/symbolic-speech/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/symbolic-speech/Conduct meant to communicate can be speech: United States v. O'Brien (1968) upheld a ban on burning draft cards under a four-part test for content-neutral rules; Tinker (1969) protected armbands; Texas v. Johnson (1989) protected flag burning as political expression. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/defamation/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/defamation/New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) held that a public official suing for defamation must prove "actual malice" (knowing falsity or reckless disregard for the truth); Gertz v. Robert Welch (1974) let states set a lower standard for private figures. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/prior-restraint/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/prior-restraint/Orders that stop speech before it happens bear a heavy presumption against validity: Near v. Minnesota (1931) struck down a law allowing newspapers to be shut down; New York Times Co. v. United States (1971), the Pentagon Papers case, refused to block publication. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/public-forum/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/public-forum/Streets and parks are traditional public forums; government may open designated or limited forums; in nonpublic forums restrictions need only be reasonable and viewpoint-neutral (Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association, 1983). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/time-place-manner/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/time-place-manner/In public forums, content-neutral rules on time, place and manner are valid if narrowly tailored to a significant government interest and leaving open ample alternative channels (Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 1989); they need not be the least restrictive means. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/schools-employees/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/schools-employees/Tinker (1969) protects student speech unless it would substantially disrupt school; Bethel (1986), Hazelwood (1988) and Morse (2007) define limits; public employees' speech as citizens on public concerns is protected (Pickering, 1968) but not speech made pursuant to official duties (Garcetti v. Ceballos, 2006). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/campaign-speech/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/campaign-speech/Buckley v. Valeo (1976) upheld limits on contributions but struck down limits on independent expenditures; Citizens United v. FEC (2010), 5 to 4, held corporations and unions may spend independently on elections; disclosure rules have mostly been upheld. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/compelled-speech-association/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/compelled-speech-association/Government may not compel people to salute the flag (West Virginia v. Barnette, 1943, overruling Gobitis) or display a state motto (Wooley v. Maynard, 1977); NAACP v. Alabama (1958) protected the privacy of membership lists; Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston (1995) and Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000) protected a parade's message and a group's expressive association. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/establishment-history/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/establishment-history/Everson v. Board of Education (1947) applied the Establishment Clause to the states, invoking Jefferson's "wall of separation," while upholding bus fare reimbursement for students at religious schools. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/establishment-tests/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/establishment-tests/Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) asked about secular purpose, primary effect and excessive entanglement; the Court also used endorsement and coercion tests (Lee v. Weisman, 1992) and, for legislative prayer and old monuments, history and tradition (Marsh v. Chambers, 1983); the Court said in 2022 that it no longer applies the Lemon test. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/school-prayer/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/school-prayer/Engel v. Vitale (1962) struck down a state-composed prayer; Abington v. Schempp (1963) struck down school-sponsored Bible reading; Lee v. Weisman (1992) and Santa Fe v. Doe (2000) struck down prayers at graduation and football games; private prayer by students is protected. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/aid-to-religion/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/aid-to-religion/Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002) upheld vouchers chosen by parents; Trinity Lutheran (2017) and Espinoza (2020) held that a state that funds private schools or programs may not exclude religious ones because they are religious. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/free-exercise/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/free-exercise/Sherbert v. Verner (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) applied strict scrutiny to burdens on religion; Employment Division v. Smith (1990) held neutral, generally applicable laws need no exemption; Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah (1993) struck down laws that targeted a faith and were not generally applicable. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/rfra/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/rfra/Congress answered Smith with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993), restoring strict scrutiny for substantial burdens on religion; City of Boerne v. Flores (1997) held it invalid as applied to states, but it binds the federal government (Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 2014). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/heller-mcdonald/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/heller-mcdonald/District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), 5 to 4, held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, struck down a handgun ban and said some longstanding regulations remain lawful; McDonald v. Chicago (2010) incorporated the right against the states. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/bruen-rahimi/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/bruen-rahimi/Heller (2008) called longstanding prohibitions presumptively lawful (possession by felons and the mentally ill, carrying in sensitive places, conditions on commercial sale) and protected arms in common use, not dangerous and unusual ones; Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016) applied Heller to stun guns; since 2022 the Court has judged gun laws by the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation rather than by tiers of scrutiny. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/fourth-amendment-search/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/fourth-amendment-search/Under Katz v. United States (1967) a search occurs when government intrudes on a reasonable expectation of privacy; United States v. Jones (2012) revived a trespass test for physical intrusions; Carpenter v. United States (2018) required a warrant for historical cell-site location records. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/warrants-exceptions/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/warrants-exceptions/Searches generally need a warrant based on probable cause, but there are exceptions: consent, plain view, search incident to arrest (Chimel, 1969), the automobile exception (Carroll, 1925), exigent circumstances, and brief stops and frisks on reasonable suspicion (Terry v. Ohio, 1968). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/exclusionary-rule/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/exclusionary-rule/Evidence from unconstitutional searches is generally excluded at trial: Weeks (1914) in federal court, Mapp v. Ohio (1961) in state courts; exceptions include good-faith reliance on a warrant (United States v. Leon, 1984), independent source and inevitable discovery. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/miranda/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/miranda/Miranda v. Arizona (1966) requires police to warn a person in custody before interrogation of the right to remain silent and to a lawyer; Dickerson v. United States (2000) held Miranda is a constitutional rule Congress cannot overrule by statute. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/fifth-amendment/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/fifth-amendment/No one may be compelled to be a witness against himself in a criminal case; double jeopardy bars a second prosecution for the same offense by the same sovereign after acquittal or conviction, though separate sovereigns (state and federal) may each prosecute (Gamble v. United States, 2019). Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/right-to-counsel/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/right-to-counsel/Powell v. Alabama (1932) required counsel in a capital case; Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), overruling Betts v. Brady, required states to provide counsel to poor defendants charged with felonies; Strickland v. Washington (1984) set the test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/jury-confrontation/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/jury-confrontation/Duncan v. Louisiana (1968) incorporated the jury trial right for serious crimes; Ramos v. Louisiana (2020) required unanimous juries in state felony trials; Batson v. Kentucky (1986) barred race-based jury strikes; Crawford v. Washington (2004) requires that testimonial statements be tested by cross-examination. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/eighth-amendment/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/eighth-amendment/The Eighth Amendment bars excessive bail and fines and cruel and unusual punishments: Furman v. Georgia (1972) halted death sentences under existing laws, Gregg v. Georgia (1976) upheld revised procedures, and the Court has barred the death penalty for people with intellectual disabilities (Atkins, 2002) and for those under 18 at the time of the crime (Roper, 2005); Timbs (2019) incorporated the Excessive Fines Clause. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/takings/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/takings/The Fifth Amendment requires just compensation when property is taken for public use; Kelo v. City of New London (2005), 5 to 4, held economic development a public use; regulations can be takings if they go "too far": Penn Central (1978) balances factors, and Lucas (1992) treats a total loss of economic value as a taking. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladderhttps://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/voting-rights-law/Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000https://teddyrookbook.com/american-history/constitutional-law-2/voting-rights-law/Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bars voting practices that result in denying or abridging the vote on account of race; Thornburg v. Gingles (1986) set the preconditions for vote dilution claims; Shelby County v. Holder (2013) struck down the preclearance coverage formula; Rucho (2019) left partisan gerrymandering claims to the political process and state courts. Constitutional Law II: Rights · American History & Civics Ladder