She also learned the law. She learned to use the law library, and she tried to be her own person in prison, and theres this wonderful anecdote which i think Ken Armstrong captured for the marshall report that said she wouldnt eat in the cafeteria. She wanted her food to be brought to her because she thought eating in the cafeteria were like pigs in a trough so she demanded her food be brought to her and she had a very specific diet because again, she very much wanted to be her own person. She had aer is the tud about her. That is how she left prison. She returned to queens and she was involved in an Organization Called the volunteer Attorney Service team where they provided legal advice to inmates. She had a number of business ventures, real estate. She was a seamstress so she was engaged a little bit in that trade and she was always looking for ways to improve herself. She left prison the same way she entered prison and the same way she acted the way, as you see in the clip, i live my
Landmark cases. Cspans special history series produced in cooperation with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories and constitutional dram as behind 12 Historic Supreme Court decisions. As behind 12 Historic Supreme Court decisions. Number 759, earnest miranda Petitioner Versus arizona. We hear arguments from number 18, roe against wade. Quite often in many of our most famous decisions are ones that the court took that were quite unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of 310 Million People who helped stick together because they believe in a rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspans history series landmark cases. Tonight is number 10 in our 12part series and you will hear about the 1962 tennessee reapportionment case and it was one that earl warren called the most important of his tenure and remember this is the court that wrote brown versus the board of education and well learn
As person having being before the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States are to draw near and give their attention. The special history series, produced in partnership with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories, and constitutional dramas behind 12 historic [ decisions. Mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court quite obvious in much of our most famous decisions are the ones that the court took that were quite unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of different people who helped stick together, because they believe in a rule of law. Good evening. Welcome to cspans landmark cases. This 1969 case of the warren Court Unanimously handed down with you most expansive interpretations ever of our First Amendment guarantees to fry speech and assembly. What are the very basics . Vandenberg was the leader of the ku klux klan in cincinnati, ohio, who held a rally for his members of hi
Having business before the Supreme Court will want to draw near and give their attention. Announcer landmark cases, cspans special history series. Exploring the human story and constitutional dramas behind 12 Supreme Court decisions. Quite often, in our famous decisions, the Supreme Court was unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate what it means to live in a society of different people who help stick together because they believe in the believe in the rule of law. Tonights case is katz v. United states. It is a 1967 case. Charles katz was an unlikely hero. He took his wiretapping case to the Supreme Court and in a seven to one decision expanded our privacy rights. We will begin by listening to Justice Samuel alito in his constitution hearings where he talked about the importance of the kats case. I was talking about cats versus the United States this morning in relation to wiretapping. You had to look into property law in the interest of an invasion, and then with the de
Versus arizona. Number 18, roe versus wade. Quite often in many of our most famous decisions are ones that the court took that were unpopular. Lets 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 believe in a rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspans landmark cases where weve been learning more about historic cases at the Supreme Court that have affected the court and affected the country. Tonight the 1961 case of mapp v. Ohio, involving dollree mapp. An ohio woman that refused to let the Police Search her house without a warrant a case that involves some back stairs intrigue at the security itself and all this evolved into a case that was one of a series in the warren courts that changed policing in america. We welcome with us this program and hope you have been with us throughout the series as weve been learning so much about the Supreme Court. Let me