Lists of landmark court decisions

A landmark case, or landmark decision, is a court decision which is published by an appeals court or by the Supreme Court, on some matter that is serious or important to a large number of people. A landmark case, once decided, shows the usual way in which the court will rule on such issues in the future, and sometimes sets how lower courts must rule in the case of the same or a similar matter coming before them. It is sometimes referred to as a precedent setting case.

In the United States, the most famous landmark case is the decision in Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973)*, in which it was ruled that a woman has a right to obtain an abortion during the first trimester (3 months) of pregnancy and that laws prohbiting this are unconstitutional.

Other landmark cases include:

Dred Scott v. Sanford (which should have read Dred Scott v. Sandford) 60 U.S. 393, 19 How. 393, 15 L.Ed. 691, (1857)*, Blacks, whether free or slaves, cannot be US citizen. Consequently, they cannot sue in federal courts. Also, the federal government cannot forbid slavery in the western territories before they access statehood. The decision is voided by the subsequent Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Plessy v. Ferguson 163 U.S. 537 (1896)*, segregated facilities for blacks and whites are constitutional under the doctrine of Separate but equal, which held for close to 100 years.
Brown v. Board of Education (of Topeka, Kansas) 344 U.S. 1 (1952), 344 U.S. 141 (1952), 347 U.S. 483 (1954), 349 U.S. 294 (1955)*, segregated schools in the several states are [unconstitutional] in violation of the 14th Amendment, overturning Plessy
Bolling v. Sharpe 347 U.S. 497 (1954)*, the companion case to Brown, which ruled that segregated schools in the District of Columbia violated the 5th Amendment
Mapp v. Ohio 367 U.S. 643 (1961)* Evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Federal Constitution is inadmissible in a criminal trial in a state court.
Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963)*, Anyone charged with a serious criminal offense has the right to an attorney and the state must provide one if they are unable to afford legal counsel
Escobedo v. Illinois 378 U.S. 478 (1964)*, a person in police custody has the right to speak to an attorney
Miranda v. Arizona (and Westover v. United States, Vignera v. New York, and California v. Stewart) 384 U.S. 436 (1966)*, police must advise criminal suspects of their rights under the Constitution to remain silent, to consult with a lawyer and to have one appointed if he is an indigent. The interrogation must stop it the suspect states he wishes to remain silent.
Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803)*, a case which established the Supreme Court's power to strike down acts of Congress which were in conflict with the United States Constitution.

* See court citation for an explanation of these numbers.

Northwestern University has a list called Supreme Court's Greatest Hits and includes some of the following; others were also added:

Abington School Dist. v. Schempp (and Murray v. Curlett), 374 U.S. 203 (1963)* First Amendment non establishment clause forbid state mandated reading of the bible, or recitation of the Lord's Prayer in public schools.
Adarand Constructors v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200 (1995)* Race based discrimination, even in favor of minorities (affirmative action) is subject to strict judicial scrutiny.
Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203 (1997)* A governement program sending government employees to parochial schoosl (among other private school) specifically to provide remedial education to disavantaged children (not to all chidren) does not violate the First Amendment non establishment clause.
Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., 501 U.S. 560 (1991)* nude dancing is not protected by the First Amendment
Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986)* a state may declare the private practice in one's bedroom of certain sex acts to be a crime; ironically this statute that was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court was later struck down by the Georgia State Supreme Court in the case of Powell v. Georgia (Actually Powell v. State). UPDATE in 2003, the Supreme Court would revisit the Bowers decision and formaly overturn it in Lawrence v. Texas.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)* Mere advocacy of the use of force, or of violation of law (in the case, by a Ku Klux Klan leader) is protected by the First Amdendment free speech clause. Only inciting others to take direct and immediate unlawful action would be without constitutionnal protection.
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993)* Government must show a compelling interest to draw a statute targeted at a religions ritual (as opposed to a statute which happens to burden the ritual, but is not directed at it). Failing to show such an interest, the prohibition of animal sacrifice is a violation of First Amendment free exercise clause.
City of Boerne v. Flores, Archbishop of San Antonio, 95-2074, 117 S.Ct. 2157, 138 L.Ed.2d 624 (1997)*
Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997)* The US president has no immunity which would requires civil law litigation against them, for facts unrelated to their office (having occured before he took office) to be stayed until the end of their term. This would deprive litigants of their Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial.
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971)* One should not be convicted for wearing in public (actually in a courtroom) a jacket emblazoned with the phrase "Fuck the Draft" (in the Vietnam war context), as this is communication, protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment. The word Fuck itself, clearly not directed at the hearer, is not in this particular instance a fighting word, and so not without constitutionnal protection.
Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976)* Setting different minimum age according to sex (female 18, male 21) to be allowed to by beer is an unconstitutionnal sex-based discrimination, contrary to the equal protection clause.
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990)* A right to die case. Family having requested the termination of life sustaining treatments of their vegetative state relative, the state may constitionnally oppose this request, for lack of a evidence of a clear earlier wish by said relative. (The state later withdrawed its objection).
Fletcher v. Peck , 10 U.S. 87 (1810) *, first state the court stoke down a State law as unconstitutionnal. A State legislature (Georgia) can repel a previous (corruply made) law (a land grant), but not void valid contracts made under this law.
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972)*, the method then in effect for imposing the death penalty is unconstitutional
Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973)* Sex-based discriminations are inherently suspect. A statute giving benefits to the spouses of male, but not female members of the uniformed services (on the assumption that only the former were dependant) is unconsitutionnal.
Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976)* Carefully drafted death penalty statutes may be constitutionnal. This ruling made executions possible again after 1972 Furman v. Georgia (see above) had stopped them.
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)* unmarried adults are entitled to use contraception and making it a crime to sell them to same is unconstitutional
Grutter v. Bollinger, ___ U.S. ___, * 02-241 (June 23,2003) a narrowly tailored use of race in students admission decision may be permissible under Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause as a diverse student body is beneficial for all students (as hinted in Regents v. Bakke).
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964)*, the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 can be applied to a place of public accommodation, prohibiting discrimination against negroes
Hurley v. Irish American Gay Group of Boston,94-749, 515 U.S. 557 (1995)* excluding a gay group from a public parade merely because the state doesn't like their opinion is unconstitutional
Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988)* a public figure shown in a parody must show actual malice to claim he is libelled
Jones v. Mayer Co., 392 U.S. 409 (1968)*, The federal government may prohibit discrimination in housing by private parties under the Civil Rights Act of 1968
Jurek v. Texas 428 U.S. 262 (1976)*, a "three-pronged" test for determining if the death penalty should be imposed is constitutional
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)* Evidence obtained by wiretaping a public phonebooth without a warrant are not amissible in court, just as if a private phone line had been eavesdropped. The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places.
Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294, 379 U.S. 802 (1964)* the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce (Article I, section 8) extends to a restaurant not patronized by interstate travellers, as it serves food which has moved in interstate commerce. This ruling makes the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to virtually all business.
Lawrence v. Texas, ___ U.S. ___,* 02-102 (June 26, 2003) Texas law that prohibits gays from engaging in consentual sodomy in private is an unreasonnable invasion of privacy, prohibited by Fourteenth Amendment due process clause.
Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992)* Public schools inviting clergy to read prayer at an official ceremony (here a graduation ceremony) violate First Amendment non-establishment clause.
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 18 L ed 2d 1010, 87 S Ct 1817 (1967)*, laws that prohibit marriage between races (anti-miscegenation statutes) are unconstitutional
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee 14 U.S 304 (1816) * federal courts may review State courts decisions when they rest on federal law or the federal constitution. This decision provider for the uniform interpretation of federal law through the various states.
M'Cullock v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819). The court stated the doctrine of implied powers, from the necessary and proper clause at Article I, section 8. To fulfill its goal, the federal government may use any means the constitution does not forbid (as opposed to only what the constitution explicitely allow, or only what is provaby necessary). State governement may in no way hinder the legitimate action of the federal governement (here, Maryland cannot levy a tax on the Bank of the United States). The court have varied in time on the extends of the implied powers, with a markedly narrower reading approximativley from the 1840's to the 1930's.
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)* To be obscene, a work must fail several tests to determine its value to society, essentially having "no redeeming social value" to be so declared
New York Times v. Sullivan, (and Abernathy v. Sullivan) 376 U.S. 254 (1964)* A public official, to prove they were libelled, must show not only that a statement is false, but that it must have been published with malicious intent
New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)* Government's desire to keep so-called "Pentagon Papers" classified is insufficient to overcome 1st Amendment hurdle
Planned Parenthood of Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)* PA's abortion law is unconstitutional and Roe v. Wade is still valid precedent
Printz v. United States (PRINTZ, SHERIFF/CORONER, RAVALLI COUNTY, MONTANA v. UNITED STATES), 95-1478, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)* Brady Act requiring state official to execute a federal law (in doing background checks for gun ownership) is unconstitutional
Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U.S. 242 (1976)* Requirement of comparison of mitigating to aggravating factors to be used to impose death sentence is constitutional
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)* Race-Based set-asides in educational opportunities violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. The decision leaves the door open to some race usage in admission decisions. See Grutter v. Bollinger.
Reno v. ACLU, 96-511 (1997) * The Commmunications Decency Act, regulating certain content on the Internet, is so overbroad as to be an unconstutional restraint on the First Amendment
Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 325 (1976), 431 U.S. 633 (1977)* Mandatory death sentences are unconstitutional
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)* Most restrictions on 1st Trimester abortion are unconstitutional
Romer v. Evans, 94-1039, 116 S. Ct. 1620 (1996)* Law prohibiting granting homosexuals protection against discrimination violates equal protection clause
Rosenberger v. University of Virginia, 94-329, 515 U.S. 819 (1995)* University can't fund sectarian groups from student dues, then exclude religious ones that also qualify
Roth v. United States (and Alberts v. California), 354 U.S. 476 (1957)* Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973)* use of property tax as means to finance public education is constitutional
South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987)* Withholding of Federal highway funds to force state to raise drinking age to 21 is permissible
Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)* Law prohibiting burning of the American flag is unconstitutional as violating the First Amendment
Tinker v. DesMoines Ind. Comm. School Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969)* Wearing armbands is a legitimate form of protest under the First Amendment
U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton, 93-1456, 93-1828 (1995)* State law cannot set term limits on members of Congress
United States v. Lopez, 93-1260, 514 U.S. 549 (1995)* The Commerce clause of the Constitution does not give Congress the power to regulate guns in state-operated schools
United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974)* The President of the United States is not above the law
United States v. Virginia, 94-1941 (1996)* Virginia Military Institute, as a state-operated institution, cannot exclude women<
Vacco v. Quill, 95-1858 (1997)* New York's prohibition on assisting suicide does not violate the Equal Protection Clause
Vernonia School District v. Acton, 94-590 (1995)* Schools may require random drug testing
Washington v. Glucksberg, 96-110 (1997)* Washington's prohibition on assisting suicide is constitutional
Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972)* Parents may remove children from public school for religious reasons
Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U.S. 280 (1976)* North Carolina's mandatory death sentence statute violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments