http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/podcast U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en The Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_1873/argument In what became known as the "Pentagon Papers Case," the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials belonging to a classified Defense Department study regarding the history of United States activities in Vietnam. The President argued that prior restraint was necessary to protect national security. This case was decided together with United States v. Washington Post Co. Sat, 26 Jun 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53995 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_31_orig/argument None Mon, 26 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63398 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_758/argument None Mon, 26 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63391 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_557/argument None Mon, 26 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63399 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5485/argument None Wed, 21 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63379 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5250/argument None Wed, 21 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63299 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_835/argument None Tue, 20 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 81500 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_798/argument None Tue, 20 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63355 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_785/argument None Tue, 20 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63389 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_835/argument-1 None Tue, 20 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63404 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_840/argument None Tue, 20 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63351 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_835/argument-2 None Tue, 20 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63427 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_759/argument None Mon, 19 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63288 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_821/argument None Mon, 19 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63308 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/1970-1979/1970/1970_577/argument Mon, 19 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63368 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_783/argument Board No. 47, Louisville, Kentucky, denied the application of Cassius Clay, also known as Muhammad Ali, for classification as a conscientious objector. Clay then took an administrative appeal to the Kentucky Appeal Board, which tentatively classified him I-A, or eligible for unrestricted military service, and referred his file to the Justice Department for an advisory recommendation. The Justice Department concluded, contrary to a hearing officer's recommendation, that Clay's claim should be denied. The Department wrote that Clay did not meet any of the three basic tests for conscientious objector status; that he is conscientiously opposed to war in any form, that this opposition is based upon religious training and belief, and that this objection is sincere. Subsequently, the Appeal Board denied Clay's claim, but without stating its reasons. When Clay refused to report for induction, he was tried and convicted of willful refusal to submit to induction. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Mon, 19 Apr 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63385 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5247/argument None Wed, 24 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63313 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_336/argument None Wed, 24 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63369 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5586/argument None Tue, 23 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63387 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_548/argument None Tue, 23 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63366 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_655/argument None Tue, 23 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63300 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_30/argument None Tue, 23 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63386 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_600/argument None Mon, 22 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63332 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_609/argument The state of Arizona restricts the distribution of welfare benefits to individuals who are either United States citizens or aliens who have lived in the country for at least 15 years. In 1969, Carmen Richardson, a resident alien of Arizona who met all requirements for welfare eligibility except the residency requirement, filed a class action lawsuit against the Commissioner of the State's Department of Public Welfare questioning the constitutionality of that requirement. The three-judge court in the District of Arizona found in favor of Richardson, but the Commissioner appealed. In the same year, a similar class action suit was filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In this case, resident aliens of Pennsylvania challenged state law which dictated that if a Pennsylvania resident did not qualify for federal aid then he or she could only receive welfare benefits from the state if he or she were a citizen or had applied for citizenship. This three-judge court also found in favor of the resident aliens. However, one judge disagreed, and the defendants, namely the Executive Director of the Philadelphia County Board of Assistance and the Secretary of the Commonwealth's Department of Public Welfare, appealed. Mon, 22 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63373 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_712/argument None Mon, 22 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63346 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_154/argument-1 None Wed, 03 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63412 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_89/569_argument This case was heard concurrently with two others, Earley v. DiCenso (1971) and Robinson v. DiCenso (1971). The cases involved controversies over laws in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. In Pennsylvania, a statute provided financial support for teacher salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials for secular subjects to non-public schools. The Rhode Island statute provided direct supplemental salary payments to teachers in non-public elementary schools. Each statute made aid available to "church-related educational institutions." Wed, 03 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 admin 62199 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_154/argument-2 None Wed, 03 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63422 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_154/argument None Wed, 03 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 81301 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_89/argument This case was heard concurrently with two others, Earley v. DiCenso (1971) and Robinson v. DiCenso (1971). The cases involved controversies over laws in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. In Pennsylvania, a statute provided financial support for teacher salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials for secular subjects to non-public schools. The Rhode Island statute provided direct supplemental salary payments to teachers in non-public elementary schools. Each statute made aid available to "church-related educational institutions." Wed, 03 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53988 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_153/argument-2 The federal Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963 provided construction grants to church-sponsored higher educational institutions. The grants were to be used for the construction of non-religious school facilities. The Act also stipulated that twenty years after the grant had been given, schools were free to use the buildings for any purpose. Tue, 02 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53993 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_812/argument None Tue, 02 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63317 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_153/argument The federal Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963 provided construction grants to church-sponsored higher educational institutions. The grants were to be used for the construction of non-religious school facilities. The Act also stipulated that twenty years after the grant had been given, schools were free to use the buildings for any purpose. Tue, 02 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 81300 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_87/argument None Tue, 02 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63283 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_153/argument-1 The federal Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963 provided construction grants to church-sponsored higher educational institutions. The grants were to be used for the construction of non-religious school facilities. The Act also stipulated that twenty years after the grant had been given, schools were free to use the buildings for any purpose. Tue, 02 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53992 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_69_5046/argument Apodaca and two other defendants were convicted of assault, burglary, and grand larceny before three separate juries, all of which returned verdicts which were less than unanimous. Two of the cases were 11-1 and the other was 10-2 in favor of conviction. Mon, 01 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53996 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_69_5035/argument The Louisiana State Constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure allowed less- than-unanimous juries to convict defendants in criminal cases in which hard labor is considered as punishment. Nine of twelve jury members were needed to return a guilty verdict. Johnson was convicted of armed robbery by a jury split nine to three. Mon, 01 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53987 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_69_5035/reargument The Louisiana State Constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure allowed less- than-unanimous juries to convict defendants in criminal cases in which hard labor is considered as punishment. Nine of twelve jury members were needed to return a guilty verdict. Johnson was convicted of armed robbery by a jury split nine to three. Mon, 01 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 admin 62289 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_515/argument None Mon, 01 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63339 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5714/argument None Mon, 01 Mar 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63378 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_507/argument None Wed, 24 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63338 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_464/argument None Wed, 24 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63345 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_544/argument None Tue, 23 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63367 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_573/argument-1 None Tue, 23 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63425 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_573/argument None Tue, 23 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 81386 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_156/argument None Tue, 23 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63400 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_573/argument-2 None Tue, 23 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63423 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_362/argument None Tue, 23 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63291 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_169/argument None Mon, 22 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63374 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5481/argument None Mon, 22 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63329 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_125/argument None Mon, 22 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63364 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_299/argument A 19-year-old department store worker expressed his opposition to the Vietnam War by wearing a jacket emblazoned with "FUCK THE DRAFT. STOP THE WAR" The young man, Paul Cohen, was charged under a California statute that prohibits "maliciously and willfully disturb[ing] the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or person [by] offensive conduct." Cohen was found guilty and sentenced to 30 days in jail. Mon, 22 Feb 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53990 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_135/argument None Wed, 20 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63284 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_534/argument None Wed, 20 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63343 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_434/argument None Wed, 20 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63393 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_133/argument None Wed, 20 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63306 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5257/argument None Tue, 19 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63337 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5342/argument None Tue, 19 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63370 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_5175/argument None Tue, 19 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63316 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_370/argument-2 None Mon, 18 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63411 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_370/argument-1 None Mon, 18 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63421 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_96/argument None Mon, 18 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63290 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_41_orig/argument None Mon, 18 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63331 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_370/argument None Mon, 18 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 81329 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_189/argument None Mon, 18 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63390 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_324/argument None Thu, 14 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63375 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_338/argument None Thu, 14 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63397 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_144/argument-2 A group of black Mississippi citizens filed for damages against two white Mississippi citizens pursuant to 42 U.S.C Section 1985 subsection 3 which protects against conspirators interfering with the civil rights of others. R.G. Grady, a citizen of Tennessee, was driving the plaintiffs in the suit along a public highway, when the defendants, acting under the misconception that Grady worked for the organization Civil Rights for Negroes, allegedly pulled their truck into the path of Grady’s car, causing him to stop. The defendants were accused of forcing Grady and his passengers to step out of the car and preventing their escape. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant James Calvin Breckenridge proceeded to beat Grady and the plaintiffs in the head with a club, injuring them. The defendants also threatened the plaintiffs verbally and pointed firearms at them. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint, basing their decision on a previous case, Collins v. Hardyman. This case limited section 1985 subsection 3 to apply only to conspiracies somehow related to state laws or state officials, to avoid possible conflict with the U.S. Constitution. The Court of Appeals agreed. Wed, 13 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63419 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_144/argument A group of black Mississippi citizens filed for damages against two white Mississippi citizens pursuant to 42 U.S.C Section 1985 subsection 3 which protects against conspirators interfering with the civil rights of others. R.G. Grady, a citizen of Tennessee, was driving the plaintiffs in the suit along a public highway, when the defendants, acting under the misconception that Grady worked for the organization Civil Rights for Negroes, allegedly pulled their truck into the path of Grady’s car, causing him to stop. The defendants were accused of forcing Grady and his passengers to step out of the car and preventing their escape. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant James Calvin Breckenridge proceeded to beat Grady and the plaintiffs in the head with a club, injuring them. The defendants also threatened the plaintiffs verbally and pointed firearms at them. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint, basing their decision on a previous case, Collins v. Hardyman. This case limited section 1985 subsection 3 to apply only to conspiracies somehow related to state laws or state officials, to avoid possible conflict with the U.S. Constitution. The Court of Appeals agreed. Wed, 13 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 81296 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_108/argument None Wed, 13 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63402 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_136/argument None Wed, 13 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63327 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_120/argument None Wed, 13 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63381 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_144/argument-1 A group of black Mississippi citizens filed for damages against two white Mississippi citizens pursuant to 42 U.S.C Section 1985 subsection 3 which protects against conspirators interfering with the civil rights of others. R.G. Grady, a citizen of Tennessee, was driving the plaintiffs in the suit along a public highway, when the defendants, acting under the misconception that Grady worked for the organization Civil Rights for Negroes, allegedly pulled their truck into the path of Grady’s car, causing him to stop. The defendants were accused of forcing Grady and his passengers to step out of the car and preventing their escape. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant James Calvin Breckenridge proceeded to beat Grady and the plaintiffs in the head with a club, injuring them. The defendants also threatened the plaintiffs verbally and pointed firearms at them. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint, basing their decision on a previous case, Collins v. Hardyman. This case limited section 1985 subsection 3 to apply only to conspiracies somehow related to state laws or state officials, to avoid possible conflict with the U.S. Constitution. The Court of Appeals agreed. Wed, 13 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63410 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_84/argument None Tue, 12 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63347 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_323/argument In the wake of a "particularly brutal" murder of a fourteen-year-old girl, the New Hampshire Attorney General took charge of police activities relating to the murder. When the police applied for a warrant to search suspect Edward Coolidge's automobile, the Attorney General, acting as a justice of the peace, authorized it. Additionally, local police had taken items from Coolidge's home during the course of an interview with the suspect's wife. Coolidge was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. Tue, 12 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 53991 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_301/argument None Tue, 12 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63336 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_117/argument None Mon, 11 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63377 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_143/argument None Mon, 11 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63360 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_345/argument None Mon, 11 Jan 1971 13:00:00 +0000 63295 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_206/argument Harris was arrested for making two sales of heroin to an undercover police officer. Before receiving the Miranda warnings, Harris said that he had made both sales at the request of the officer. This statement was not admitted into evidence at the trial. However, Harris later testified in Court that he did not make the first sale and in the second sale he merely sold the officer baking powder. Harris' initial statement was then used by the prosecution in an attempt to impeach his credibility. Thu, 17 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 53989 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_121/argument None Thu, 17 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63312 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_62/argument None Thu, 17 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63320 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_118/argument None Thu, 17 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63328 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_109/argument None Wed, 16 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63292 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_123/argument None Wed, 16 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63359 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_113/argument None Wed, 16 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63330 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_98/argument-2 None Tue, 15 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63416 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_98/argument-1 None Tue, 15 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63428 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_98/argument None Tue, 15 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81507 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_76/argument None Tue, 15 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63287 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_124/argument Willie Griggs filed a class action, on behalf of several fellow African- American employees, against his employer Duke Power Company . Griggs challenged Duke's "inside" transfer policy, requiring employees who want to work in all but the company's lowest paying Labor Department to register a minimum score on two separate aptitude tests in addition to having a high school education. Griggs claimed that Duke's policy discriminated against African-American employees in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. On appeal from a district court's dismissal of the claim, the Court of Appeals found no discriminatory practices. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. Mon, 14 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 53986 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_205/argument None Mon, 14 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63395 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_107/argument None Mon, 14 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63349 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_61/59_argument None Mon, 14 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81392 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_95/argument None Thu, 10 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63342 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_77/argument None Thu, 10 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63350 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_322/argument These cases involve juveniles brought to trial without a jury. The first involves Joseph McKeiver and Edward Terry, fifteen and sixteen year old boys charged with acts of robbery, theft, assault, and escape. At trial before the Juvenile Court of Philadelphia, each was denied a request for a jury trial. A Superior Court affirmed the order, and, after consolidation of their cases, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania did likewise, saying there was no constitutional right to a jury trial for juveniles. In re Burrus concerns the consolidated cases of more than forty juveniles ranging in age from eleven to fifteen. Most of the juveniles faced misdemeanor charges stemming from protests of school consolidations that took place in November and December, 1968 during which, on six different occasions, they blocked traffic and refused to clear the roadway. Additionally, one sixteen-year-old juvenile faced charges of disorderly conduct for an incident that occurred at the local school. In each case, the judge denied a request for a jury trial. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of North Carolina both affirmed the lower court's decision, finding no constitutional requirement for a jury trial for juvenile defendants. Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81322 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_85/argument None Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63302 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_322/argument-1 These cases involve juveniles brought to trial without a jury. The first involves Joseph McKeiver and Edward Terry, fifteen and sixteen year old boys charged with acts of robbery, theft, assault, and escape. At trial before the Juvenile Court of Philadelphia, each was denied a request for a jury trial. A Superior Court affirmed the order, and, after consolidation of their cases, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania did likewise, saying there was no constitutional right to a jury trial for juveniles. In re Burrus concerns the consolidated cases of more than forty juveniles ranging in age from eleven to fifteen. Most of the juveniles faced misdemeanor charges stemming from protests of school consolidations that took place in November and December, 1968 during which, on six different occasions, they blocked traffic and refused to clear the roadway. Additionally, one sixteen-year-old juvenile faced charges of disorderly conduct for an incident that occurred at the local school. In each case, the judge denied a request for a jury trial. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of North Carolina both affirmed the lower court's decision, finding no constitutional requirement for a jury trial for juvenile defendants. Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63417 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_322/argument-3 These cases involve juveniles brought to trial without a jury. The first involves Joseph McKeiver and Edward Terry, fifteen and sixteen year old boys charged with acts of robbery, theft, assault, and escape. At trial before the Juvenile Court of Philadelphia, each was denied a request for a jury trial. A Superior Court affirmed the order, and, after consolidation of their cases, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania did likewise, saying there was no constitutional right to a jury trial for juveniles. In re Burrus concerns the consolidated cases of more than forty juveniles ranging in age from eleven to fifteen. Most of the juveniles faced misdemeanor charges stemming from protests of school consolidations that took place in November and December, 1968 during which, on six different occasions, they blocked traffic and refused to clear the roadway. Additionally, one sixteen-year-old juvenile faced charges of disorderly conduct for an incident that occurred at the local school. In each case, the judge denied a request for a jury trial. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of North Carolina both affirmed the lower court's decision, finding no constitutional requirement for a jury trial for juvenile defendants. Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63406 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_85/325_argument None Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81323 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_73/argument None Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63314 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_322/argument-2 These cases involve juveniles brought to trial without a jury. The first involves Joseph McKeiver and Edward Terry, fifteen and sixteen year old boys charged with acts of robbery, theft, assault, and escape. At trial before the Juvenile Court of Philadelphia, each was denied a request for a jury trial. A Superior Court affirmed the order, and, after consolidation of their cases, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania did likewise, saying there was no constitutional right to a jury trial for juveniles. In re Burrus concerns the consolidated cases of more than forty juveniles ranging in age from eleven to fifteen. Most of the juveniles faced misdemeanor charges stemming from protests of school consolidations that took place in November and December, 1968 during which, on six different occasions, they blocked traffic and refused to clear the roadway. Additionally, one sixteen-year-old juvenile faced charges of disorderly conduct for an incident that occurred at the local school. In each case, the judge denied a request for a jury trial. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of North Carolina both affirmed the lower court's decision, finding no constitutional requirement for a jury trial for juvenile defendants. Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63426 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_322/128_argument These cases involve juveniles brought to trial without a jury. The first involves Joseph McKeiver and Edward Terry, fifteen and sixteen year old boys charged with acts of robbery, theft, assault, and escape. At trial before the Juvenile Court of Philadelphia, each was denied a request for a jury trial. A Superior Court affirmed the order, and, after consolidation of their cases, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania did likewise, saying there was no constitutional right to a jury trial for juveniles. In re Burrus concerns the consolidated cases of more than forty juveniles ranging in age from eleven to fifteen. Most of the juveniles faced misdemeanor charges stemming from protests of school consolidations that took place in November and December, 1968 during which, on six different occasions, they blocked traffic and refused to clear the roadway. Additionally, one sixteen-year-old juvenile faced charges of disorderly conduct for an incident that occurred at the local school. In each case, the judge denied a request for a jury trial. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of North Carolina both affirmed the lower court's decision, finding no constitutional requirement for a jury trial for juvenile defendants. Wed, 09 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81294 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_92/argument None Tue, 08 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63401 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_75/argument None Tue, 08 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63318 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_66/argument-2 None Mon, 07 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63424 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_1066/argument-2 None Mon, 07 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63405 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_26/argument None Mon, 07 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63380 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_88/argument None Mon, 07 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63372 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_66/argument-1 None Mon, 07 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63414 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_1066/argument-1 None Mon, 07 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63403 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_1066/argument None Mon, 07 Dec 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81289 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_65/argument None Thu, 19 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63383 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_71/argument None Thu, 19 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63310 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_79/argument None Thu, 19 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63361 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_47/argument None Wed, 18 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63394 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_44/argument None Wed, 18 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63384 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_40/argument None Wed, 18 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63294 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_60/argument None Tue, 17 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63358 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_78/argument None Thu, 12 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63321 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_29/argument None Thu, 12 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63311 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_63/argument None Tue, 10 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63352 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_55/argument None Tue, 10 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63333 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_80/argument None Tue, 10 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63392 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_203/204_argument None Mon, 09 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81307 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_203/argument None Mon, 09 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63324 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_97/argument None Mon, 09 Nov 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63365 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_99/argument None Thu, 22 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63388 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_36/argument None Wed, 21 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63297 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_81/82_argument None Wed, 21 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81498 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_81/argument None Wed, 21 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63285 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_46/argument None Tue, 20 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63371 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_69/argument Barbara James and her son Maurice lived in the Bronx, New York City. Shortly after Maurice's birth, Barbara James applied for assistance under New York State's Aid to Families with Dependent Children program (AFDC). James began receiving assistance after a caseworker visited her apartment. Two years later, James was scheduled to be visited again by a caseworker. This visit was required under New York State law and would affect her benefits under AFDC. She refused to allow this visit. In a procedural hearing, she continued her refusal, and her AFDC assistance was terminated by New York State as a result. James then filed suit under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging that the caseworker visit was a search and would violate her Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The District Court ruled in her favor. New York appealed. Tue, 20 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63289 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_43_orig/argument-2 None Mon, 19 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63298 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_43_orig/argument-1 None Mon, 19 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63303 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_49/argument None Thu, 15 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63356 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_444/argument None Tue, 13 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63301 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_436/argument None Tue, 13 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 81349 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_420/argument None Tue, 13 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63396 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_436/argument-2 None Tue, 13 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63418 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_436/argument-1 None Tue, 13 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63415 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_281/argument After the Supreme Court's decision in 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education, little progress had been made in desegregating public schools. One example was the Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, system in which approximately 14,000 black students attended schools that were either totally black or more than 99 percent black. Lower courts had experimented with a number of possible solutions when the case reached the Supreme Court. Mon, 12 Oct 1970 13:00:00 +0000 53994 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_25/argument-1 None Wed, 21 Jan 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63464 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1970/1970_25/argument None Wed, 21 Jan 1970 13:00:00 +0000 63335 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_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_7_3/reargument-2 None Tue, 01 Apr 1969 13:00:00 +0000 63571 at http://www.oyez.org