http://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/podcast U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en The Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_776/argument None Tue, 29 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83367 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_798/argument None Mon, 28 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83369 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_791/argument None Thu, 24 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83368 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_705/argument None Thu, 24 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83365 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_830/argument None Thu, 24 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83370 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_670/argument None Wed, 23 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83363 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_701/argument None Wed, 23 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83364 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_750/argument None Wed, 23 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83366 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_574/argument None Tue, 22 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79688 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_624/argument-1 None Tue, 22 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79830 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_624/argument None Tue, 22 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 83362 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_228/argument None Tue, 22 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79726 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_130/argument None Mon, 21 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79641 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_138/argument Adam Clayton Powell pecked at his fellow representatives from his unassailable perch in New York's Harlem. Powell had been embroiled in controversy inside and outside Washington. When Powell failed to heed civil proceedings against him in New York, a judge held him in criminal contempt. His problems were only beginning. He won reelection in 1966 but the House of Representatives voted to exclude him. Mon, 21 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 53902 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_610/argument None Wed, 02 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79741 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2_2/argument-2 The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) fairness doctrine requires radio and television broadcasters to present a balanced and fair discussion of public issues on the airwaves. The doctrine is composed of two primary requirements concerning personal attacks in the context of public issue debates and political editorializing. The FCC conditioned its renewal of broadcast licenses on compliance with its regulations. Red Lion Broadcasting challenged the application of the fairness doctrine with respect to a particular broadcast. In a companion case (United States v. Radio Television News Directors Association (RTNDA)), the fairness doctrine's requirements concerning any broadcast were challenged. Wed, 02 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79753 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2_2/argument-1 The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) fairness doctrine requires radio and television broadcasters to present a balanced and fair discussion of public issues on the airwaves. The doctrine is composed of two primary requirements concerning personal attacks in the context of public issue debates and political editorializing. The FCC conditioned its renewal of broadcast licenses on compliance with its regulations. Red Lion Broadcasting challenged the application of the fairness doctrine with respect to a particular broadcast. In a companion case (United States v. Radio Television News Directors Association (RTNDA)), the fairness doctrine's requirements concerning any broadcast were challenged. Wed, 02 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79650 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2_2/argument-3 The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) fairness doctrine requires radio and television broadcasters to present a balanced and fair discussion of public issues on the airwaves. The doctrine is composed of two primary requirements concerning personal attacks in the context of public issue debates and political editorializing. The FCC conditioned its renewal of broadcast licenses on compliance with its regulations. Red Lion Broadcasting challenged the application of the fairness doctrine with respect to a particular broadcast. In a companion case (United States v. Radio Television News Directors Association (RTNDA)), the fairness doctrine's requirements concerning any broadcast were challenged. Wed, 02 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79829 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2_2/argument The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) fairness doctrine requires radio and television broadcasters to present a balanced and fair discussion of public issues on the airwaves. The doctrine is composed of two primary requirements concerning personal attacks in the context of public issue debates and political editorializing. The FCC conditioned its renewal of broadcast licenses on compliance with its regulations. Red Lion Broadcasting challenged the application of the fairness doctrine with respect to a particular broadcast. In a companion case (United States v. Radio Television News Directors Association (RTNDA)), the fairness doctrine's requirements concerning any broadcast were challenged. Wed, 02 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 53897 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2_2/717_argument The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) fairness doctrine requires radio and television broadcasters to present a balanced and fair discussion of public issues on the airwaves. The doctrine is composed of two primary requirements concerning personal attacks in the context of public issue debates and political editorializing. The FCC conditioned its renewal of broadcast licenses on compliance with its regulations. Red Lion Broadcasting challenged the application of the fairness doctrine with respect to a particular broadcast. In a companion case (United States v. Radio Television News Directors Association (RTNDA)), the fairness doctrine's requirements concerning any broadcast were challenged. Wed, 02 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79704 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_672/argument None Wed, 02 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79745 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_3/argument None Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79706 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2/argument-1 California's Criminal Syndicalism Act prohibited advocating, teaching, or aiding the commission of a crime or unlawful acts of violence or terrorism. John Harris, a socialist, was indicted under the statute. Harris claimed the law had a "chilling effect" on his freedom of speech. After a California state court upheld Harris' conviction, a federal district court struck down the Act because of vagueness and overbreadth. Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79828 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_3/reargument-2 None Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63571 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2/reargument California's Criminal Syndicalism Act prohibited advocating, teaching, or aiding the commission of a crime or unlawful acts of violence or terrorism. John Harris, a socialist, was indicted under the statute. Harris claimed the law had a "chilling effect" on his freedom of speech. After a California state court upheld Harris' conviction, a federal district court struck down the Act because of vagueness and overbreadth. Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 admin 62308 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2/argument California's Criminal Syndicalism Act prohibited advocating, teaching, or aiding the commission of a crime or unlawful acts of violence or terrorism. John Harris, a socialist, was indicted under the statute. Harris claimed the law had a "chilling effect" on his freedom of speech. After a California state court upheld Harris' conviction, a federal district court struck down the Act because of vagueness and overbreadth. Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 53896 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_841/argument None Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 81501 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_841/argument-1 None Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79712 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_841/argument-2 None Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79748 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_3/reargument None Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79261 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_620/argument None Thu, 27 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79693 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_770/argument Local police officers went to Chimel's home with a warrant authorizing his arrest for burglary. Upon serving him with the arrest warrant, the officers conducted a comprehensive search of Chimel's residence. The search uncovered a number of items that were later used to convict Chimel. State courts upheld the conviction. Thu, 27 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 53901 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_573/585_argument-%29 None Wed, 26 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 80411 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_573/585_argument None Wed, 26 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79833 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_573/585_argument-%29 None Wed, 26 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 80412 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_573/argument None Wed, 26 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79687 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_573/585_argument-%29 None Wed, 26 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79740 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_573/585_argument-%29 None Wed, 26 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79759 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_749/argument None Wed, 26 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79709 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_9/reargument None Tue, 25 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63441 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_9/argument None Tue, 25 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79749 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_548/argument None Tue, 25 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79686 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_488/argument-1 None Mon, 24 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79681 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_488/argument-2 None Mon, 24 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79682 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_4/reargument None Mon, 24 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63341 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_4/argument None Mon, 24 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79673 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_488/argument None Mon, 24 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 81369 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_748/argument None Wed, 05 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79747 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_13_2/reargument None Tue, 04 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63480 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_642/argument None Tue, 04 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79743 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_13_2/argument None Tue, 04 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79643 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_473/argument-1 None Mon, 03 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79756 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_517/argument None Mon, 03 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79738 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_463/argument None Mon, 03 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79679 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_473/argument None Mon, 03 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 81364 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_473/argument-2 None Mon, 03 Mar 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79736 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_403/argument None Thu, 27 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79671 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_492/argument Brandenburg, a leader in the Ku Klux Klan, made a speech at a Klan rally and was later convicted under an Ohio criminal syndicalism law. The law made illegal advocating "crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform," as well as assembling "with any society, group, or assemblage of persons formed to teach or advocate the doctrines of criminal syndicalism." Thu, 27 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 53900 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_814/argument None Thu, 27 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79711 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_641/argument None Wed, 26 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79695 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_645/argument None Wed, 26 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 81399 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_643/argument None Wed, 26 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79696 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_645/argument-1 None Wed, 26 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79689 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_644/argument None Wed, 26 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79697 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_645/argument-2 None Wed, 26 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79744 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_436/argument None Tue, 25 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79734 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_5_2/argument None Tue, 25 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 81376 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_453/argument None Tue, 25 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79678 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_5_2/argument-2 None Tue, 25 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79757 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_5_2/reargument None Tue, 25 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63334 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_297/argument None Tue, 25 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79662 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_5_2/argument-1 None Tue, 25 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79737 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_76/argument None Mon, 24 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79710 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_413/argument None Mon, 24 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79672 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_413/418_argument None Mon, 24 Feb 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79733 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_306/argument None Thu, 23 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79663 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_156/argument None Thu, 23 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79723 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_646/argument None Thu, 23 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79699 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_343/argument None Thu, 23 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79666 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_49/argument None Wed, 22 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79683 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/117_argument-%29 None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 80224 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/argument None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79720 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/117_argument-%29 None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79832 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/117_argument-%29 None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79639 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/117_argument-%29 None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79718 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/117_argument-%29 None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 80223 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/117_argument None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 81292 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_109/117_argument-%29 None Tue, 21 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79831 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_258/argument Section 2012 of the New York Education Law permitted school districts to limit eligible voters in school district elections to citizens owning or leasing taxable real property and parents of children enrolled in public schools. Union School District No. 15 applied these restrictions. On April 25, 1965, Morris H. Kramer, a resident of district 15 who resided with his parents and had no children, attempted to register for the local school district elections. His application was rejected for failure to comply with the restrictions. Kramer filed a class-action suit against the school board in federal court, claiming his constitutional rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment had been violated. The district court initially declined to hear his constitutional claims, but, on appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit directed the district court to hear Kramer's claim. On hearing the complaint, the court found no constitutional violation and denied Kramer's claim. Thu, 16 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79657 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_376/argument None Thu, 16 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79668 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_243/argument None Wed, 15 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79727 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_291/argument None Wed, 15 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79660 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_280/argument None Wed, 15 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79728 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_158/172_argument None Tue, 14 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79649 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_158/argument None Tue, 14 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79646 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_293/argument-1 Law enforcement officers, under the authority of a warrant, searched Stanley's home pursuant to an investigation of his alleged bookmaking activities. During the search, the officers found three reels of eight-millimeter film. The officers viewed the films, concluded they were obscene, and seized them. Stanley was then tried and convicted under a Georgia law prohibiting the possession of obscene materials. Tue, 14 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79654 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_293/argument-2 Law enforcement officers, under the authority of a warrant, searched Stanley's home pursuant to an investigation of his alleged bookmaking activities. During the search, the officers found three reels of eight-millimeter film. The officers viewed the films, concluded they were obscene, and seized them. Stanley was then tried and convicted under a Georgia law prohibiting the possession of obscene materials. Tue, 14 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79729 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_293/argument Law enforcement officers, under the authority of a warrant, searched Stanley's home pursuant to an investigation of his alleged bookmaking activities. During the search, the officers found three reels of eight-millimeter film. The officers viewed the films, concluded they were obscene, and seized them. Stanley was then tried and convicted under a Georgia law prohibiting the possession of obscene materials. Tue, 14 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 53898 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_273/argument None Tue, 14 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79659 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_30/argument None Mon, 13 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79730 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_2/argument-2 None Mon, 13 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79763 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_2/reargument-1 None Mon, 13 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63568 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_2/argument-1 None Mon, 13 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79762 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_238/argument None Mon, 13 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 79655 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_2/reargument-2 None Mon, 13 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63569 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7_2/argument None Mon, 13 Jan 1969 13:00:00 +0000 81433 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_366/argument None Thu, 12 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79667 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_201/argument None Thu, 12 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79725 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_201/reargument None Thu, 12 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79766 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_200/argument None Thu, 12 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79652 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_65/argument-2 None Wed, 11 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79760 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_69/argument None Wed, 11 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79703 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_198/argument None Wed, 11 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79724 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_65/argument None Wed, 11 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81401 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_65/argument-1 None Wed, 11 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79698 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_150/argument None Wed, 11 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79645 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_60/argument None Tue, 10 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79690 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_44/argument None Tue, 10 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79676 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_61/argument None Tue, 10 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79691 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_43/argument None Mon, 09 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79675 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_71/argument-2 None Mon, 09 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79761 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_71/argument None Mon, 09 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81426 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_199/argument None Mon, 09 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79651 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_71/argument-1 None Mon, 09 Dec 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79701 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_45/argument None Thu, 21 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79677 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_131/argument None Wed, 20 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79642 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_56/argument-1 None Wed, 20 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79685 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_73/argument None Wed, 20 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79707 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_56/argument None Wed, 20 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81384 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_56/argument-2 None Wed, 20 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79758 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_74/argument None Wed, 20 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79708 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_56/argument None Wed, 20 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81385 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_47/argument None Tue, 19 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79680 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_68/argument None Tue, 19 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79702 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_9_orig_2/argument None Mon, 18 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79713 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_42/argument None Mon, 18 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79674 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_41/argument None Mon, 18 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81342 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_41/argument-1 None Mon, 18 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79665 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_27/argument None Mon, 18 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79658 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_41/argument-2 None Mon, 18 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79755 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_38/argument None Thu, 14 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79732 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_39/argument None Thu, 14 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79669 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_40/argument None Thu, 14 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79670 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_24/argument None Wed, 13 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79656 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_32/argument None Wed, 13 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81321 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_32/argument-1 None Wed, 13 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79664 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_32/argument-2 None Wed, 13 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79754 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_63/argument None Wed, 13 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79694 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_21/argument John Tinker, 15 years old, his sister Mary Beth Tinker, 13 years old, and Christopher Echardt, 16 years old, decided along with their parents to protest the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to their Des Moines schools during the Christmas holiday season. Upon learning of their intentions, and fearing that the armbands would provoke disturbances, the principals of the Des Moines school district resolved that all students wearing armbands be asked to remove them or face suspension. When the Tinker siblings and Christopher wore their armbands to school, they were asked to remove them. When they refused, they were suspended until after New Year's Day. Tue, 12 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 53899 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_12/argument None Tue, 12 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79721 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_51/argument None Tue, 12 Nov 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79648 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_35/argument None Thu, 24 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79731 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_46/argument None Thu, 24 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79735 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_29/argument None Thu, 24 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79661 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_20/argument None Wed, 23 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79653 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_17/argument None Tue, 22 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81303 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_17/argument-2 None Tue, 22 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79750 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_16/argument None Tue, 22 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79647 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_17/argument-1 None Tue, 22 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79640 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_14/argument None Tue, 22 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79644 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_6/argument None Mon, 21 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79692 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_19/argument None Mon, 21 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81305 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_19/argument-1 None Mon, 21 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79751 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_19/argument-2 None Mon, 21 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79752 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_5/argument None Mon, 21 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79684 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_647/argument The National Democratic Party of Alabama (NDPA) sought to place the names of minority candidates on the ballot for local and state-wide offices. Alabama election officials denied the NDPA request under the Alabama Corrupt Practices Act. The NDPA then brought suit in a special three-judge U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama claiming constitutional violations. NDPA lost and appealed directly to the Supreme Court. Initially, the Court heard arguments on October 18 in support of a temporary restraining order which it had granted on October 14. The day after oral argument, the Court granted the order and subsequently addressed the merits of the controversy on March 25. Fri, 18 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79700 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_13/argument None Thu, 17 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79722 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_10/argument None Thu, 17 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79719 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_8/argument Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) applied for, and were issued, a search warrant to assist in uncovering evidence of defendant William Spinelli conducting illegal gambling activities. In the affidavit required for the warrant application, the FBI agents stated the defendant was known to "local law enforcement officials as a bookmaker." The FBI related in the affidavit that agents had tracked defendant Spinelli for five days, and that on four of the days, Spinelli was seen crossing into St. Louis, MO, entering an apartment at 1108 Indian Circle Drive. Finally, the agents offered that they "had been informed by a confidential reliable informant that William Spinelli is operating a handbook and accepting wagers and disseminating wagering information by means of the telephones which have been assigned the numbers WYdown 4-0029 and WYdown 4-0136." Wed, 16 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81497 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_8/argument-1 Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) applied for, and were issued, a search warrant to assist in uncovering evidence of defendant William Spinelli conducting illegal gambling activities. In the affidavit required for the warrant application, the FBI agents stated the defendant was known to "local law enforcement officials as a bookmaker." The FBI related in the affidavit that agents had tracked defendant Spinelli for five days, and that on four of the days, Spinelli was seen crossing into St. Louis, MO, entering an apartment at 1108 Indian Circle Drive. Finally, the agents offered that they "had been informed by a confidential reliable informant that William Spinelli is operating a handbook and accepting wagers and disseminating wagering information by means of the telephones which have been assigned the numbers WYdown 4-0029 and WYdown 4-0136." Wed, 16 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79746 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_8/argument-2 Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) applied for, and were issued, a search warrant to assist in uncovering evidence of defendant William Spinelli conducting illegal gambling activities. In the affidavit required for the warrant application, the FBI agents stated the defendant was known to "local law enforcement officials as a bookmaker." The FBI related in the affidavit that agents had tracked defendant Spinelli for five days, and that on four of the days, Spinelli was seen crossing into St. Louis, MO, entering an apartment at 1108 Indian Circle Drive. Finally, the agents offered that they "had been informed by a confidential reliable informant that William Spinelli is operating a handbook and accepting wagers and disseminating wagering information by means of the telephones which have been assigned the numbers WYdown 4-0029 and WYdown 4-0136." Wed, 16 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79764 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_7/argument The Arkansas legislature passed a law prohibiting teachers in public or state- supported schools from teaching, or using textbooks that teach, human evolution. Epperson, a public school teacher, sued, claiming the law violated her First Amendment right to free speech as well as the Establishment Clause. The State Chancery Court ruled that it violated his free speech rights; the State Supreme Court reversed. Wed, 16 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79705 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_3/argument-2 Voters and candidates in Mississippi and Virginia filed four separate cases seeking judgments that certain amendments to their states' election laws and procedures were subject to the pre-approval requirements of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and hence were not enforceable until the state complied with the requirements. The district courts found that the Voting Rights Act did not apply to the voting changes in the four cases and dismissed the complaints. The voters and candidates filed direct appeals, and the cases were consolidated. Tue, 15 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 66837 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_3/argument-1 Voters and candidates in Mississippi and Virginia filed four separate cases seeking judgments that certain amendments to their states' election laws and procedures were subject to the pre-approval requirements of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and hence were not enforceable until the state complied with the requirements. The district courts found that the Voting Rights Act did not apply to the voting changes in the four cases and dismissed the complaints. The voters and candidates filed direct appeals, and the cases were consolidated. Tue, 15 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 66838 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_3/argument Voters and candidates in Mississippi and Virginia filed four separate cases seeking judgments that certain amendments to their states' election laws and procedures were subject to the pre-approval requirements of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and hence were not enforceable until the state complied with the requirements. The district courts found that the Voting Rights Act did not apply to the voting changes in the four cases and dismissed the complaints. The voters and candidates filed direct appeals, and the cases were consolidated. Tue, 15 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 81320 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_9_orig/argument-1 None Mon, 14 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79716 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_9_orig/argument-2 None Mon, 14 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79765 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_543/argument To be placed on the ballot in a presidential election, Ohio law required a new political party obtain voter signatures totaling 15% of the number of ballots cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Both the American Independent Party and the Socialist Labor Party sought ballot access in Ohio for the 1968 presidential election. The American Independent Party, formed by supporters of George C. Wallace, obtained the requisite number of signatures but failed to file its petition for ballot access prior to the February 7, 1968 deadline. The Socialist Labor Party, which until 1948 had been on the ballot, failed to collect enough signatures and was also kept off the ballot. The parties filed separate suits in U.S. District Court against several state officials, including Governor James A. Rhodes, contending that being kept off the ballot violated their rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The cases were consolidated, and the court ruled that each party must be given write-in access but did not require the state to print the parties' candidates' names on the ballot. The American Independent Party requested and was granted an injunction forcing the state to add the party's candidates to the ballot while the case was on appeal. The Socialist Labor Party filed a similar request, but did so much later, and was denied primarily to avoid confusion in requiring the reprinting of another set of ballots. Mon, 07 Oct 1968 13:00:00 +0000 79739 at http://www.oyez.org