Audio of the 1961 U.S. Supreme Court opinion Mapp v. Ohio.

Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us anywhere you get your podcasts.

This week we heard the Supreme Court opinions in two major segregation cases: Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education as well as a special bonus episode reviewing a century-long segregation timeline. In this bonus episode, picking up where the last bonus episode ended, you'll hear the story of the first court-ordered public school integration following the Brown decision.

Public newsreel clips courtesy of the Library of Congress 

Audio of the unanimous decision of the Court in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954)

This bonus episode walks the listener through a century-long American timeline of slavery and segregation that is connected by three Supreme Court decisions - two of which are featured on the show this week: Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), and Brown v. Board of Education (1954). 

For more episodes like this one, you might want to check out a subscription to the show on Apple Podcasts, in which I go beyond the Court's opinions to tell the stories behind the cases featured on the show.

Special thanks to Charles Shomo for the music on this episode by Caffeine Creek Band on Pixabay

Audio of the 1896 opinion of the Supreme Court s in Plessy v. Ferguson.

*Note: The audio quality of the earliest episodes (like this one) is not the best. Sorry. Don't worry, the quality gets better in the episodes ahead as I learn the new skillset required.

Listen to audio of full episodes of Supreme Court opinions on What SCOTUS Wrote Us - anywhere you get your podcasts.

Audio of the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. O'Brien (1968).

*Note: The audio quality of the earliest episodes (like this one) is not the best. Sorry. Don't worry, the quality gets better in the episodes ahead as I learn the new skillset required.

Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get podcasts.

Music by Epidemic Sound

Audio of the 1971 per curiam opinion of the Court in New York Times Company v. United States 

Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us wherever you get your podcasts. 

Audio of the opinion of the Court in Schenck v. United States (1919). 

*Note: The audio quality of the earliest episodes (like this one) is not the best. Sorry. Don't worry, the quality gets better in the episodes ahead as I learn the new skillset required.

Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us anywhere you get your podcasts.

A reading of the 1971 Supreme Court case New York Times v. United States which addresses the Nixon administration's efforts to prevent the publication of what it considered to be "classified information" in an act that the Court considered to be "prior restraint." Prior restraint is, essentially, censorship that prevents the publication of specific information beforehand. In Near v. Minnesota (1931), the Court held prior restraints to be unconstitutional, with the exception of extremely limited circumstances such as serious threats to national security. In New York Times v. United States, the Supreme Court affirmed the prior restraint doctrine when they allowed newspapers to print the Pentagon Papers in 1971. The Pentagon Papers were secret documents about the Vietnam war that had been stolen by a former Pentagon employee and given to the New York Times and the Washington Post to publish. The federal government claimed that publishing the documents would be a threat to national security. But, the Court asserted that it was the government's burden to prove that the publication of such documents would cause "inevitable, direct, and immediate danger to the united states" and it (the government) had not done so in this case. The Court held that the newspapers not only had a right to publish the information at issue, but also that the public had a right to hear it.

The question before the Court was weather the Nixon administration's efforts to prevent the publication of the Pentagon Papers violate the First Amendment? In a per curium opinion, the Court said it did.

This audio includes the primary text of the dissenting opinion, but excludes citations in order to create a better listening experience. You may access the full opinion and other essential case information on Oyez.org at the link below:

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873

Music by Oleksii Kaplunskyi at Pixabay

Audio File URL: 

http://pixabay.com/music/elevator-music-elevator-music-bossa-nova-background-music-version-60s-10900/

Audio of the opinion of the Court in Reed v. Reed (1971).

The question in this case was whether an Idaho Probate Code stating that "males must be preferred to females" in appointing administrators of estates violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In a unanimous decision, the Court said it did.

*Note: The audio quality of the earliest episodes (like this one) is not the best. Sorry. Don't worry, the quality gets better in the episodes ahead as I learn the new skillset required.

Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us anywhere you get your podcasts.