Best and Worst Supreme Court rulings

[A18]

What do you think are the best and worst Supreme Court rulings in the last 100 years?

Best:
--United States v. Lopez (striking down a federal law prohibiting gun possession in schools for exceeding congressional power under the Commerce Clause)
--Witters v. Washington Department of Services for the Blind (upholding the use of federal aid for religious purposes, if part of a broader program)
--Texas v. Johnson (striking down a state law against flag burning on First Amendment grounds)
--McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission (striking down a state law prohibiting the distribution of anonymous campaign literature)
--Boy Scouts v. Dale (declaring a New Jersey sexual orientation law unconstitutional as applied to the Boy Scouts)

Worst:
--Reynolds v. Sims (mandating that state senate districts be roughly equal in population on equal protection grounds)
--Wickard v. Filburn (application of amendments to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to the production and consumption of homegrown wheat, because if the farmer didn't grow it, he'd have to buy it in interstate commerce)
--Lee v. Weisman (prohibiting prayer at high school graduations because a student might feel "pressured" to participate, or at least stand)
--Lawrence v. Texas (invoking "substantive due process" to strike down a law prohibiting homosexual sodomy... the statute was ridiculously stupid, but still constitutional)
--Roe v. Wade (not constitutional law, and barely pretends to be)
--McConnell v. FEC (completely dismantled free speech)

[Emsworth]

Best:
1. Texas v. Johnson
2. United States v. Lopez
3. New York Times Co. v. United States
4. West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
5. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer

Worst:
1. Roe v. Wade
2. Lochner v. New York
3. Reynolds v. Sims
4. Griswold v. Connecticut
5. Korematsu v. United States

[afleitch]

One of the best: Lawrence v Texas.

[A18]

One of the best: Lawrence v Texas.

Since you're British, I guess I'll excuse the fact that you hate the Constitution.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Best:
Griswold v. Connecticut
Brown v. Board of Ed
Lawrence v. Texas
Roe v. Wade
Loving v. Virginia
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish

Worst:
Bush vs. Gore
Gregg v. Georgia
Adkins v. Children's Hospital

[afleitch]

One of the best: Lawrence v Texas.

Since you're British, I guess I'll excuse the fact that you hate the Constitution.

I don't hate it. I studied it and I actually admire it and I hope Scotland would adopt something sililar if it became independent. Once again you jump to conclusions without asking the individual concerned. But then again I've grown to expect that from you.

[A18]

One of the best: Lawrence v Texas.

Since you're British, I guess I'll excuse the fact that you hate the Constitution.

I don't hate it. I studied it and I actually admire it and I hope Scotland would adopt something sililar if it became independent. Once again you jump to conclusions without asking the individual concerned. But then again I've grown to expect that from you.

Only people who hate the Constitution support blatantly activist decisions like Lawrence v. Texas, or any other "substantive due process" case. Take jFraud for example.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

One of the best: Lawrence v Texas.

Since you're British, I guess I'll excuse the fact that you hate the Constitution.

I don't hate it. I studied it and I actually admire it and I hope Scotland would adopt something sililar if it became independent. Once again you jump to conclusions without asking the individual concerned. But then again I've grown to expect that from you.

Only people who hate the Constitution support blatantly activist decisions like Lawrence v. Texas, or any other "substantive due process" case. Take jFraud for example.

So do you support activist rulings like Bush v. Gore and Santa Clara county v. Southern Pacific?

[Emsworth]

Best:
Griswold v. Connecticut
Brown v. Board of Ed
Lawrence v. Texas
Roe v. Wade
Loving v. Virginia
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish

Worst:
Bush vs. Gore
Gregg v. Georgia
Adkins v. Children's Hospital

Surely, there is no possible argument that can justify Roe v. Wade, but not justify Adkins v. Children's Hospital. If substantive due process can be used to strike down social regulations endorsed by the majority, then it can be used to strike down economic regulations endorsed by the majority as well. Why should the "liberty" referred to in the due process clause entail the right to kill a fetus, but not the right to accept a wage lower than the one mandated by the state?

One of the best: Lawrence v Texas.

The result reached in Lawrence was definitely a good one. The Texas law prohibiting sodomy, to quote Justice Potter Stewart, was "an uncommonly silly one." However, there is in my opinion no constitutional basis for the decision. Nowhere in the document is any sort of right to engage in sexual relations indicated.

[afleitch]

Thats true, but there was also no right to bar certain sexual relations.

[A18]

Thats true, but there was also no right to bar certain sexual relations.

For a state law to be unconstitutional, it must violate some provision of the Constitution.

[Yates]

I would say that the best was McCulloch v. Maryland.  It paved the way for national law to be considered above state law, which allows our nation to function.

The worst is difficult, though I would choose Plessy v. Ferguson.  The Court could not justify its stance of "separate but equal" in that case.

[Schmitz in 1972]

Vincent v. Widmar, Boy Scouts v. Dale, and Witters v. Washington are some of the best

Kelo v. New London, Roe v. Wade, Stenberg v. Carhart, and Employment Division v. Smith are some of the worst