Court nominations. You are watching American History tv on cspan three. My name is naomi and im 11 years old. Me and my friend carter led a walkout earner alum entry school and are on the 14th. Im a sophomore at aubergine aversive three years ago, i stood exactly where yall are today and attended my first march for life. We march for our whole generation. We are the generation. One more cases, cspans special history series. Produced in partnership with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 Historic Supreme Court decisions. Mr. Chief justice, made please the court. Good evening, and welcome to cspans landmark cases. Tonights case is tinker versus Des Moines Independent Community School District. In this 1969 case, a court in a seven to two decision ruled that students First Amendment rights to free speech are still protected even when they are at school. For the next 90 minutes, we will learn more about the history of this case
Exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 Historic Supreme Court decisions. Number 7 59. Since row against weighed. Quite often, and very famous decisions, are ones that corked took that were quite unpopular. Let us go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually, what it means to live in a society of 310 million different people who helped stick together because they believed in the rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspan and the National Constitution centers landmark cases. Tonight, we are going to be examining a 1944 war powers case of the Supreme Court. It is the story of korematsu v. United states. Aaa iaea detained through the course of the war. Mr. Korematsu said that was wrong. We have two people helping us learn the story. Peter irons is the civil rights attorney and editor of ten books including justice at war, the story of the japanese american internment cases. In the course of researching his book on this case, he found th
The District Court committed multiple fundamental errors in refusing to dismiss this suit and plaintiffs can i ask you to speak up just a little bit . Bring the microphone a little closer, if you can. And the plaintiffs are fundamentally mistaken in asserting that this court is powerless to correct any of those errors at this time. Now, we have identified two different paths through which this court can have mandamus relief. The Supreme Court made clear that separation of powers considerations are of utmost important when considering mandamus petitions involving the president of the United States. For example, the court quoted chief Justice Marshall to say that in no case would a court be required to proceed against the president as it would against a private individual. And moreover, the court said that the high respect that is due the office of the president must be considered throughout the entire proceeding. Now, what does that imply in this case . It implies the following. Their p
Columbia seek to an implied cause of action to enforce emolument clause against the president of the United States. The Municipal Court committed errors in dismissing the suit could i ask you to speak up just a little bit and bring the microphone closer if you can. And the plaintiffs are fundamentally mistaken in asserting that this court is powerless to correct any of those errors at this time. Now, we have identified two different paths through which this court can grant mandamus relieve. The Supreme Court in cheney made clear, its utmost when involving mandamus and the preds of the United States and in no case would a court be required to proceed against the president as it would against a private individual and moreover, the court said that the high respect due the office of the president must be considered throughout the entire proceeding. Now, what does that imply in this case . It implies the following. Their position is that even if the District Court erred in refusing to dismi
United states in his official capacity. The District Court committed multiple fundamental errors for refusing to dismiss the suit and plaintiffs are speedy spake up just a little bit and bring the microphone a little closer if you can. The plaintiffs are fundamentally mistaken in asserting that this court is powerless to correct any of those errors at this time. We have identified two different pass through which this court can grant relief but theres one overarching point that is of central importance. That is this. The Supreme Court in cheney make clear separation of powers are taken, our utmost important when considering mandamus petitions involving the president of the United States. For example, the court quoted chief Justice Marshall to say that in no case where the court be required to treat come proceed against the president as what against a private individual. Moreover, the court said the high respect that is to the office of the president must be considered throughout the en