Take the VP Challenge: Can you name ANY SCOTUS decision other than Roe v Wade?

[downtown]

When I worked for the Federal Judicial Center, all I did was read previous cases. Off the top of my head, I got 8, and I could double that my leafing around my notebook here in my office.

Granted, it has a lot to do with my work...but still. You couldn't get DC v Heller? That should be right in her wheelhouse.

 

[Trajan12]

Off the Top of my head, no googling:

Loving V Virginia- Miscegenation Laws

Brown V Board of Education- School Desegregation

Plessy V Ferguson- 'Separate but Equal'

Muller V Oregon- Length of the Workday

Every American should at least know the first three. EVERY ONE. And Jesus, what about Hamdan V Rumsfeld? That happened in 2006!

EDIT: Miranda V Arizona! Shameful of me...

 

[DNK]

HAMDAN! I was sitting there for three minutes trying to remember the guy's name...

 

[Erik Mesoy]

I couldn't think of any off the top of my head, but I knew the names of a bunch of cases mentioned, which I didn't identify as SCOTUS cases specifically, just "important", like Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and Brown v. Board of Education, which I noticed were SCOTUS in this thread.

 

[woody60707]

I can guess one or two, but can't be a 100% sure. Like I guessed Brown vs Board of Education (but I also couldn't name the state).

Now I know about some of the big ones. Like that DC gun ban one, or the 1st time separate but equal was upheld by the SCOTUS, when it was stuck down, Miranda rights (i had no clue it was part of the name). I could go on if I keep thinking about. Now I don't care, nor did I think its really important if she can name the names of SCOTUS rulings.

BUT!, and this is a big but, if she couldn't give a general summary of any other ruling by the SCOTUS other then about abortion, then that would be bad. But I already don't like her, so this really doesn't change my mind about anything. lol

 

[Dr.Mindbender]

HAMDAN! I was sitting there for three minutes trying to remember the guy's name...

http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2005/2005_05_184/argument/

This is a tough case to listen and read.

Thank god for the intuhnet. All you have to do is press play and then....

 

[JollyRoger]

What self-respecting gun nut can't name Heller?

 

[Masquerouge]

I couldn't remember any. Then I read the thread, and I was like "OH YEAH!"

 

[Trajan12]

I will be watching the debate with Biden...!

 

[raketooy]

U.S. v 95 Barrels of Apple Cider Vinegar or w/e it was.

 

[JollyRoger]

Being governor of Alaska, she should have easily been able to give Exxon v. Baker since if was decided this year and caused many of her constituents to not be able to collect punitive damages.

 

[IglooDame]

It's possible that, being unused to big-league media interviews, Palin is just choking. As JR says, how could she not remember Exxon v. Baker? I can almost give her a pass on Heller, given that its ramifications will not impact Alaska at all. But that said, my initial optimism regarding picking Palin is steadily fading...

 

[Ansar]

Heh, I remembered Brown vs. Board of Education

 

[mitsho]

As a European, may I ask the question:

Why is it important?

Clarification: What do Court Cases matter? It is the law that matters, (which I agree is in your country oddly influenced by the juidicial system...). But anyway, it shouldn't be important to know in what case the segregation was abolished, but it seems more important to know what the situation today is (what is allowed, what not).

 

[negZero]

Bush vs Gore
Brown vs Board
Tinker vs Des Moines
Hustler vs Falwell

Now I wonder what was the first SCOTUS decision

 

[Miles Teg]

As a European, may I ask the question:

Why is it important?

Clarification: What do Court Cases matter? It is the law that matters, (which I agree is in your country oddly influenced by the juidicial system...). But anyway, it shouldn't be important to know in what case the segregation was abolished, but it seems more important to know what the situation today is (what is allowed, what not).

A common law system places much more emphasis on precedent, and gives greater latitude to the courts in making interpreting law,so landmark cases are much more important.

 

[Azale]

Marbury v Madison comes to me instantly, then a little bit of thinking for Plessy v Ferugson and Brown v Board of Education.

 

[JollyRoger]

As a European, may I ask the question:

Why is it important?

Clarification: What do Court Cases matter? It is the law that matters, (which I agree is in your country oddly influenced by the juidicial system...). But anyway, it shouldn't be important to know in what case the segregation was abolished, but it seems more important to know what the situation today is (what is allowed, what not).

You would have to have an appreciation for the case law to know what is allowed and what isn't. Knowing foundational cases like Brown v. Board of Education would be important to knowing where the state of the law is today. Plus, if you are vying to be a heartbeat away from being able to make hundreds of lifetime appointments to the bench, your knowledge of American case law should not begin and end with Roe v. Wade.

 

[hossam]

lawrence v texas

 

[Cutlass]

Griswold v. Connecticut, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut