Supreme Court Cases

1759 Words4 Pages

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs. Sawyer Also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, it was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the US Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. The Majority decision was that the President had no power to act except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress. Marbury vs. Madison: A landmark case in United States Law and the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States, under Article Three of the US Constitution. This case resulted from a petition to the Supreme Court by William Marbury, who had been appointed as Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia by President John Adams shortly before leaving office, but whose commission was not delivered as required by John Marshall, Adams' Secretary of State. When Thomas Jefferson assumed office, he ordered the new Secretary of State, James Madison, to withhold Marbury's and several other men's commissions. Being unable to assume the appointed offices without the commission documents, Marbury and three others petitioned the Court to force Madison to deliver the commission to Marbury. The Supreme Court denied Marbury's petition, holding that the statute upon which he based his claim was unconstitutional. The Court rendered a unanimous decision, throwing out the case. Plessey vs. Ferguson: A landmark United States Supreme Court decision in the jurisprudence of the United States, upholding the constitutionality ... ... middle of paper ... ...ct someone. Lombard vs. Louisiana: Three Negro students and one white student, entered a store in New Orleans, La., sat at a lunch counter reserved for white people and requested service, which was refused. For refusing to leave when requested to do so by the manager of the store, they were convicted of violating the Louisiana Criminal Mischief Statute, which makes it a crime to refuse to leave a place of business after being ordered to do so by the person in charge of the premises. No state statute or city ordinance required racial segregation in restaurants; but both the Mayor and the Superintendent of Police had announced publicly that such "sit-in demonstrations" would not be permitted. The Supreme Courts decision was that no state statute or city ordinance here forbids desegregation of the races in all restaurant facilities and the convictions were reversed.

Open Document