Howell v. McAuliffe
292 Va. 320 (2016)
Opinion Summary
Struck down Governor McAuliffe's blanket executive order restoring voting rights to over 200,000 convicted felons, holding that the Virginia Constitution requires an individualized assessment of each felon's case. The Governor subsequently restored rights on an individual basis.
Related Cases
Schenck v. United States
249 U.S. 47 (1919)
Upheld the Espionage Act conviction of a man distributing anti-draft leaflets during World War I. Justice Holmes introduced the 'clear and present danger' test for limiting free speech, stating that 'the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre.' The clear and present danger test was later replaced by the Brandenburg incitement test.
Baker v. Carr
369 U.S. 186 (1962)
Held that legislative apportionment is a justiciable issue, overturning decades of precedent treating redistricting as a political question. Allowed federal courts to hear challenges to malapportioned legislative districts under the Equal Protection Clause, leading to the 'one person, one vote' principle in Reynolds v. Sims.
Gideon v. Wainwright
372 U.S. 335 (1963)
Unanimously held that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is a fundamental right incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. States must provide attorneys for criminal defendants who cannot afford them. Clarence Earl Gideon, who had represented himself and lost, was acquitted at retrial with appointed counsel.
Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (1966)
Held that the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination requires law enforcement to advise suspects of their rights before custodial interrogation. The now-famous Miranda warnings include the right to remain silent, that statements may be used against the suspect, the right to counsel, and that counsel will be appointed if the suspect cannot afford one.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
395 U.S. 444 (1969)
Established the modern incitement test for the First Amendment, holding that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting imminent lawless action and is likely to produce such action. Overruled the earlier 'clear and present danger' test from Schenck, providing the strongest protection for political speech.
Case Information
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- Court Level
- State Supreme Court
- Date Decided
- Friday, July 22, 2016
- Citation
- 292 Va. 320 (2016)
- Jurisdiction
- Virginia