To make it easier to identify trends, this page rearranges the Wikipedia page List of landmark court decisions in the United States into chronological order with cases grouped by Supreme Court justice (beginning with the Marshall Court). Following the case description is the category in which this case can be found on the original page. Within each year, cases are sorted by the United States Reports volume and page.
Seven cases are listed twice since they made landmark changes in two different categories.
Early years (1789–1800) 1793 Chisholm v. Georgia, The Constitution prevents the states from exercising sovereign immunity. Therefore, the states can be sued in federal court by citizens of other states. This decision was voided by the Eleventh Amendment in 1795, just two years after it was handed down. – Category: Federalism
1796 Hylton v. United States, A tax on the possession of goods is not a direct tax that must be apportioned among the states according to their populations. This case featured the first example of judicial review by the Supreme Court. – Category: Federalism Ware v. Hylton, A section of the Treaty of Paris supersedes an otherwise valid Virginia statute under the Supremacy Clause. This case featured the first example of judicial nullification of a state law. – Category: Federalism
Marshall Court (1801–1835) 1803 Marbury v. Madison, Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 is unconstitutional because it attempts to expand the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond that permitted by the Constitution. Congress cannot pass laws that contradict the Constitution. This case featured the first example of judicial nullification of a federal law and it was the point at which the Supreme Court adopted a monitoring role over government actions.Laura Langer, Judicial Review in State Supreme Courts: A Comparative Study (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002), p. 4 – Category: Separation of powers
1804 Little v. Barreme, The President does not have "inherent authority" or "inherent powers" that allow him to ignore a law passed by the US Congress. Presidential orders which contradict acts of Congress are illegal, and military officers are responsible for the execution of illegal commands, despite the nature of military chain of command. – Category: Separation of powers
1810 Fletcher v. Peck, A state legislature can repeal a corruptly made law, but the Contract Clause of the Constitution prohibits the voiding of valid contracts made under such a law. This was the first case in which the Supreme Court struck down a state law as unconstitutional. – Category: Federalism
1812 United States v. Hudson, Congress must pass laws criminalizing activities. Common law crimes do not exist on the federal level. – Category: Criminal law: Other areas
1816 Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, Federal courts may review state court decisions when they rest on federal law or the federal Constitution. This decision provides for the uniform interpretation of federal law throughout the states. – Category: Federalism
1817 Laidlaw v. Organ, Established the contract law principle caveat emptor in the United States. – Category: Other areas: Businesses/Corporations/Contracts
1819 McCulloch v. Maryland, The Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution grants to Congress implied powers for implementing the Constitution's express powers, and state actions may not impede valid exercises of power by the federal government. – Category: Federalism Dartmouth College v. Woodward, The Contract Clause of the Constitution applies to both public and private corporations. – Category: Other areas: Businesses/Corporations/Contracts
1821 Cohens v. Virginia, State laws in opposition to national laws are void. The U.S. Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction for any U.S. case and final say. – Category: Federalism
1823 Johnson v. McIntosh, Private citizens cannot purchase lands from Native Americans. – Category: Native American law Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1823) Some of the rights protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause include the freedom of movement through the states, the right of access to the courts, the right to purchase and hold property, an exemption from higher taxes than those paid by state residents, and the right to vote. This case was decided by Supreme Court Justice Bushrod Washington while riding circuit in the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. It is notable for Washington asserting the existence of cognizable rights within the ambit of the Privileges and Immunities Clause that are nowhere within the Constitution's text. – Category: Individual rights: Other areas
1824 Gibbons v. Ogden, The power to regulate interstate navigation is granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. – Category: Federalism
1832 Worcester v. Georgia, The Supreme Court laid out the relationship between tribes and the state and federal governments. It is considered to have built the foundations of the doctrine of tribal sovereignty in the United States, because the relationship between the Indian Nations and the United States is that of nations. – Category: Native American law
1833 Barron v. Baltimore, The Bill of Rights cannot be applied to the state governments. This decision has essentially been rendered moot by the Supreme Court's adoption of the incorporation doctrine, which uses the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to apply portions of the Bill of Rights to the states. – Category: Federalism
1834 Wheaton v. Peters, There is no common law copyright after a work's publication, and court reporters cannot hold copyrights on the cases compiled in the course of their work. Notable for being the first United States Supreme Court ruling on copyright. – Category: Other areas: Copyright/Patents
Taney Court (1836–1864) 1842 Swift v. Tyson, Federal courts hearing cases were bound to follow the statutory laws of states that they were asked to enforce, but not the state's common law. The goal was to encourage the development of a federal common law; since that did not occur, the decision was overruled almost a century later by Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins. – Category: Other areas: Other
1849 Luther v. Borden, Established the political question doctrine in controversies arising under the Guarantee Clause of Article Four of the United States Constitution. – Category: Other areas: Other
1852 Cooley v. Board of Wardens, When local circumstances make it necessary, the states can regulate interstate commerce as long as such regulations do not conflict with federal law. State laws related to commerce powers can be valid if Congress is silent on the matter. – Category: Federalism
1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford, People of African descent that are slaves or were slaves and subsequently freed, along with their descendants, cannot be United States citizens. Consequently, they cannot sue in federal court. Slavery in the United States cannot be prohibited in U.S. territories before they are admitted to the Union as doing so would violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. After the Civil War, this decision was voided by the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. – Category: Individual rights: Discrimination based on race and ethnicity
1859 Ableman v. Booth, State courts cannot issue rulings that contradict the decisions of federal courts. – Category: Federalism
Chase Court (1864–1873) 1866 Ex parte Milligan, Trying citizens in military courts is unconstitutional when civilian courts are still operating. Trial by military tribunal is constitutional only when there is no power left but the military, and the military may validly try criminals only as long as is absolutely necessary. – Category: Individual rights: Other areas
1868 Crandall v. Nevada, Freedom of movement between states is a fundamental right; a state cannot inhibit people from leaving it by imposing a tax on doing so. – Category: Individual rights: Freedom of movement
1869 Texas v. White, The states that formed the Confederate States of America during the Civil War never actually left the Union because a state cannot unilaterally secede from the United States. – Category: Federalism
1871 United States v. Klein, The principle of separation of powers prohibits Congress from prescribing a rule of decision for the federal courts to follow in particular pending cases, because the legislative branch cannot impair the exclusive powers of another branch. – Category: Separation of powers
1873 Slaughter-House Cases, The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to the benefits of federal United States citizenship but not to the benefits of state citizenship. – Category: Fourteenth Amendment rights
Waite Court (1874–1888) 1876 United States v. Cruikshank, The Second Amendment has no purpose other than to restrict the powers of the federal government. The right to keep and bear arms for a lawful purpose is not a right granted by the Constitution or dependent upon the Constitution for its existence. (overruled by District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010)). – Category: Second Amendment rights
1879 Reynolds v. United States, Religious belief or duty cannot be used as a defense against a criminal indictment. – Category: First Amendment rights: Freedom of religion
1880 Strauder v. West Virginia, The exclusion of individuals from juries solely because of their race is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. This was the first time that the Supreme Court reversed a state criminal conviction due to a violation of a constitutional provision concerning criminal procedure. – Category: Individual rights: Discrimination based on race and ethnicity
1883 Civil Rights Cases, Neither the Thirteenth nor the Fourteenth Amendment empower Congress to safeguard blacks against the actions of private individuals. (Partially overruled by Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co.) – Category: Individual rights: Power of Congress to enforce civil rights Ex parte Crow Dog, U.S. courts do not have criminal jurisdiction in cases where one Native American murders another on reservation lands. The Supreme Court also ruled that tribes held exclusive jurisdiction over their own internal affairs, including murder cases. The U.S. Congress responded with the Major Crimes Act, by which Congress has exercised since absolute (plenary) power over tribal jurisdiction by excluding certain crimes from that jurisdiction. This case was the beginning of the plenary power legal doctrine that has been used in Indian case law to limit tribal sovereignty. – Category: Native American law
1884 Hurtado v. California, State governments, as distinguished from the federal government, need not use grand juries in criminal prosecutions. – Category: Criminal law: Other areas Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, Congress's extension of copyright to cover photography was within constitutional limits. – Category: Other areas: Copyright/Patents Elk v. Wilkins, An Indian cannot make himself a citizen of the United States without the consent and the co-operation of the United States Federal government. – Category: Native American law
1886 Presser v. Illinois, An Illinois law that prohibits common citizens from forming personal military organizations, performing drills, and parading is constitutional because such a law does not limit the personal right to keep and bear arms. – Category: Second Amendment rights Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Racially discriminatory application of a racially neutral statute violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. – Category: Individual rights: Discrimination based on race and ethnicity United States v. Kagama, Congress has plenary power over all Native American tribes within its borders. – Category: Native American law