1.Kylie Francisco
2.Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896)
3.Plessy refused to sit on the colored section of the train. He was arrested.
4.Plessy was released and the Supreme Court had to rethink his arguments. The felt they could be "seperate but equal".
5. The impact it has today is that the seperation issues are not tolerated. It changed many peoples view on treating people more equal on buses, businesses and schools.

1. Mandie Nick
2. Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans vs. The Crescent City Livestock landing and slaughterhouse Co. 1873
3. Benevolent Association challenged the act on the grounds that it violated the Thirteenth Amendment and the Privileges and Immunities, Due Process, and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
4. The state of Louisiana was within its regular police powers to protect publichealth to establish a monopoly slaughterhouse down river from New Orleans.
5. The impact on the country was that the amendments are written very carefully and the Louisiana legislature passed an act in 1869 to clean up the Mississippi River from the dumping of refuse into the river from the many small independent slaughterhouses.


Alissa Brink
Plessy v. Fergonson (1892)
Plessy refused to sit in the colored only section on a railroad train. He was arressted and in supreme court his arguments that the Luoisiana Jim Crow law violated his constitutional rights under the 13th and 14th amendments was rejected.
Plessy was eventually released and his arguments were rethinked for what was then future refrence.
This decision meant that without this argument seperation wouldn't be taken sereously like it is today. The impact is that people know what we would and wouldn't have if we still had seperation like we used to.


1.Rushi Patel
2.Dred Scott vs. Sandford*(1857) *Originally spelled Sanford(Supreme Court misspelled Name.)
3.Scott was a slave in Missouri, one of the only states during his time to allow slavery, due to a past compromise. Scott argued his case because the doctrine, or principle, of Missouri was "once free, always free." He thought that he should be free under it. Scott had to try this case twice, once in 1850 and once in 1857, he lost the first time on a technicality.
4. Sanford's lawyers argued their case, saying Dred Scott wasn't a citizen and couldn't argue his case, and that he was a piece of property according to the Missouri compromise. This led the Supreme Court to rule against Scott.
5.This meant that Scott could not sue his slave owner and was still a slave. The country was now in uproar at the verdict, this ultimately led to the Civil War, four years later.Sadly he died a year later.

1.Alex Scotland
2.Jones vs. Alfred H. Mayer Co.-April 1st,1968 --- Decided: June 17, 1968
3.This court case was chalenged on the rights of the 14th amendment and was later decided that i had to do with the 13th amendmen as well.Right to prohibit discrimination in purely private matters.
4.The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint and the case, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that it applies only to state action, and does not reach private refusals.
5.Later reveiwed it was a case dealing with civil rights. It means that the case was dismissed and there were no further questions. It was a small case that some how made it to the states supreme court and didn't have much of a impact on the country.



Maya- Jones vs. Alfred H. Mayor Co.
The case Jones vs. Alfred H. Mayor is about a developer in 1968 who refused to sell Joseph Jones a home because he was black. Jones then sued the company for the violation of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, and the violation of the thirteenth amendment. The developer claimed that Congress lacked the power under Section 2 of the thirteenth amendment to ban private discrimination in housing, however the court rejected. Jones won the case, and the Alfred H. Mayor Company was forced to build them a house. The court stated afterwords refusing to build someone a home because of their race should not be tolerated from now on.

1.David C.
2.Pollock v. Williams(1944)
3.Pollock entered a plea of guilty, and was later told that he had no right to counsel, and was sentanced to work for another organization. He was, essentially, a slave.
4.The Thirteenth Amendment protects against unvoluntary labor, and the court decided that Pollock has the right to counsel and the right agained forced labor.
5.Forced labor without a way out is unconstitutional, and may not be a crime.

Scott B is doing Plessy v. Ferguson

Chrissy Scaglione is doing memphis vs. greene





1.Tommy Keller
2.U.S. v. Ryan (1956)
3.The amendment was challenged because Ryan did not allow people accomidations to a theatre in which he allowed a person whose color is not stated the accomidation.
4.The decision was that because the thirteenth amendment did not protect discrimination against individuals Ryan was let go.
5.This meant that even tough he discriminated, he still wasn't charged because it didn't go against any law yet passed. The impact was that Ryan was wrongly brought to trial even though discrimination is wrong.

Tyler Roy
McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education 1950
McLaurin sued University of Oklahoma to let him take classes there. He won, but a U.S. Supreme court reversed the decision making him take classes in a segregated manner. He petitioned to a US district court to let him take classes with other students. They denied him the right to take classes with other students.
He appealed the case to the US supreme court, and they reversed the decision, letting him take classes with other students.
The effect on the country is that now all students can take classes together.







1. Noelle Wahad
2. Butler v. Perry 1916
3. This amendment was challenged because there was a law in Florida stating that every able-bodied man had to work on public roads for six 10 hour days every year. This was unconstitutional.
4. They stated that it was okay to have every able-bodied man to work on public roads for six 10 hour days every year.
5. This meant, that for six 10 hour days each year, every able-bodied man will had to work on public roads.


1. Alyssa Fay
2. Patterson v. Colorodo(1907)
3. The amendment was challanged because the defendant published articles and a cartoon which reflected very badly on the justices of the Colorado Supreme Court.
4. The outcome was that they put the man that published the articals in jail.
5. This was important because people cant go around doing what they want even though the first amendment states that they can.

1. Andrew Kero
2. Morgan V. Virginia (March 27, 1946)
3. The white and colored passengers in their buses so that the seats will not be occupied by persons of different races at the same time.
4. Colored separation of the passengers in there vehicle carriers requires national uniformity of treatment rather than diversity of treatment at this time.
5. The impact on the country was that segregation on bus travel was unconstitutional.


1. Niko Salvatoriello
2. Bailey vs. United States (1995)
3. Roland Bailey and Candisha Robinson were both convicted for having a gun along with illegal drugs. Is evidence of the proximity and accessibility of a firearm to drugs alone sufficient to support a conviction for "use" of a firearm during a predicate narcotics offense?
4. In a 9-0 vote they said no it is not enough alone to convict someone for the "use" of a firearm.
5. It means that if you are found with a gun a drugs you cannot be convicted for the "use" of a firearm.