Reflective DBQ: The Warren Court

This question is based on the accompanying documents. The question is designed to test your
ability to work with historical documents. Some of the documents have been edited for the
purposes of the question. As you analyze the documents, take into account the source of each
document and any point of view that may be presented in the document.

Background: Between 1953 and 1969, the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court
was Earl Warren. Supreme Court decisions made during the Warren Court era led to
significant changes in various aspects of life in the United States. Several important court cases
affected equal protection under the law, separation of church and state, and the rights of
individuals accused of crimes.
Task: Using information from the documents and your knowledge of U.S. history, answer the
questions that follow each document in Part A. Your answers to the questions will help you write
the Part B essay, in which you will be asked to: Discuss how decisions of the Warren Court
affected American society

Part A: Short Answer

Document 1a
. . . The Warren Court (19531969) revolutionized constitutional law and American society. First,
the unanimous and watershed [critical] school desegregation ruling, Brown v. Board of
Education, in 1954 at the end of Warrens first year on the bench. Then, in 1962 Baker v. Carr
announced the reapportionment revolution guaranteeing equal voting rights [to individual
voters no matter where they lived]. And throughout the 1960s, the Court handed down a series
of rulings on criminal procedure that extended the rights of the accused and sought to ensure
equal access to justice for the poor. Mapp v. Ohio (1961), extending the exclusionary rule to the
states, and Miranda v. Arizona (1966), sharply limiting police interrogations of criminal suspects,
continue to symbolize the Warren Courts revolution in criminal justice. . . .
-- Source: David M. OBrien, The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger to Rehnquist, PS, Winter 1987
Question 1a: According to David M. OBrien, what is one effect of the Warren Court on
American society?
- The Chief Justice affected society by extending the rights of the everyday
person, and allowing more opportunities for the everyday person to be treated equally.

Document 1b
. . .The Warren Courts revolution in public law promoted acrimony [hostility] and bitterness
precisely because it empowered those who had previously not had the opportunity to exercise
power. Whether we approve of their behavior or not, there is little doubt that these new groups
added dramatically and often disturbingly to the contours of American society. Much of what the
Warren Court did was to release dissident minorities from long-standing legal and social
strictures [limits]. Critics complained that the Court was the root of the problem; it was fostering
subversive [disobedient] action by civil rights advocates, Communist agitators, criminals, smut
peddlers, and racketeers who hid behind the Fifth Amendment when called to account. . . .
-- Source: Kermit Hall, The Warren Court in Historical Perspective, Bernard Schwartz, ed.,
The Warren Court: A Retrospective, Oxford University Press, 1996

Question 1b: According to Kermit Hall, what is one criticism leveled against the decisions of the
Warren Court?
- He says that the court was the root of the problem, that it was allowing the
disobedient actions of the people to hide behind the Fifth Amendment.

Document 2

Mrs. Nettie Hunt, sitting on the steps of

the U. S. Supreme Court Building in
Washington, explains the significance
of the Courts May 17, 1954
desegregation ruling to her daughter,
Nikie 3 , in this
November 19, 1954 photo.

Source: With an Even Hand, Brown v. Board of Education exhibition, Library of Congress (adapted)

Questions 2:Based on this photograph (High Court Bans Segregation) and caption, what is the
significance of the Brown v. Board of Education decision?
- The significance of this is that it has set a precedent for the coming years that
segregation is a thing of the past and we have become better as a nation and we are
making steps in the right direction to become better.

Document 3a
. . . The promise of Brown was not fulfilled in the way that we envisioned it, says U.S.
Secretary
of Education Rod Paige, who was a student at Mississippis all-black Jackson State University
when the decision was handed down. Within the first few years after the decision, paratroopers
were protecting black students entering Central High School in Little Rock, Ark., schools were
shuttered [closed] entirely in Prince Edward County, Va., and white families across the South
put
their children into private schools. By 1971, the court had endorsed busing to overcome the

residential segregation that was keeping black and white children apart. Particularly in the
South,
the integration drive worked, as the share of black children attending majority white schools
rose
from 0.1% in 1960 to a high of 44% in 1988. . . .
-- Source: Rebecca Winters, No Longer Separate, But Not Yet Equal, Time, May 10, 2004

Document 3b
. . . Even though the effects of Brown were slow in comingreal desegregation only occurred
with the 1964 Civil Rights Act and aggressive enforcement by the Department of Justice, which
denied federal funds to any segregated schoolthey were revolutionary. Greenberg [Jack
Greenberg, a member of the Brown legal team] cites encouraging evidence today as the halffull
approach: there are black Cabinet members in Democrat and Republican administrations;
blacks hold top management positions in major corporations like Citibank, Xerox, Time Warner,
and Merrill Lynch. When Greenberg started practicing law in 1949 there were only two black
U.S. Congressmen. Today [2004] there are 39.
Brown broke up the frozen political system in the country at the time, Greenberg notes.
Southern congressmen made it a priority to keep African-Americans from obtaining power, but
Brown allowed for change. Judge Carter [Robert Carter, a member of the Brown legal team]
believes that the greatest accomplishment of the ruling was to create a black middle class: The
court said everyone was equal, so now you had it by right.. . .
-- Source: Kristina Dell, What Brown Means Today, Time, May 17, 2004

Question 3: Based on these documents, state two effects of the Brown v. Board of Education
Supreme Court decision on American society.
- The effects of the decision would be that it allowed for change, and it said
everyone was equal not just by belief but by law

Document 4
. . . QUESTION: Mr. President, in the furor [uproar] over the Supreme Courts decision [in
Engel v. Vitale] on prayer in the schools, some members of Congress have been introducing
legislation for Constitutional amendments specifically to sanction [permit] prayer or religious
exercise in the schools. Can you give us your opinion of the decision itself, and of these moves
of
the Congress to circumvent [get around] it?
THE PRESIDENT: I havent seen the measures in the Congress and you would have to make
a determination of what the language was, and what effect it would have on the First
Amendment. The Supreme Court has made its judgment, and a good many people obviously
will disagree with it. Others will agree with it. But I think that it is important for us if we are going
to maintain our Constitutional principle that we support the Supreme Court decisions even when
we may not agree with them.
In addition, we have in this case a very easy remedy, and that is to pray ourselves and I would
think that it would be a welcome reminder to every American family that we can pray a good
deal
more at home, we can attend our churches with a good deal more fidelity, and we can make the
true meaning of prayer much more important in the lives of all of our children. That power is
very much open to us. . . .
-- Source: President John F. Kennedy, News Conference, June 27, 1962

Question 4
A. What was one effect of the Engel v. Vitale decision on public schools in
the United States?
- It gave reasons to congress to make it a law allowing praying in school

B. What does President John F. Kennedy suggest as a remedy to those

who disagree with the Supreme Courts decision in Engel v. Vitale?
- That they can just pray in their head if they dont want to say it out loud.

Question 5
ATLANTA, Nov. 21 As President Clinton and the new Republican leadership in Congress

consider measures that would return organized prayer to public schools, it is worth
remembering one thing.
Prayer is already there.
Despite a Supreme Court ruling [Engel v. Vitale] 32 years ago that classroom prayer and
Scripture reading are unconstitutional even if they are voluntary, prayer is increasingly a part of
school activities from early-morning moments of silence to lunchtime prayer sessions to prefootball-game prayers for both players and fans.
The most common forms are state-mandated moments of silence at the beginning of the day,
which are permissible to the extent they are not meant to be a forum for organized prayer. But,
particularly in the South, religious clubs, prayer groups and pro-prayer students and community
groups are making religion and prayer part of the school day. . . .
-- Source: Peter Applebome, Prayer in Public Schools? Its Nothing New for Many,
New York Times, November 22, 1994

Question 5:
According to Peter Applebome, what are two ways in which prayer in public schools continued
despite the Supreme Court ruling in Engel v. Vitale?
- Early morning moments of silence and lunch time prayers

Document 6:
In the decades following the Engel decision, federal courts have continued to hear cases and
make rulings on issues involving separation of church and state.

FRANKFORT, Ky. A civic group will send a Ten Commandments monument back to
Frankfort only if political leaders give assurances that it will be displayed publicly, as a new law
allows. . . .
The Ten Commandments monument was part of an ever-growing list of religious issues that
[Governor Ernie] Fletcher and other political leaders have dealt with this year. . . .
The Eagles [a fraternal organization] donated the Ten Commandments monument to the state

in 1971. It was removed from the Capitol grounds and placed in storage in the mid-1980s during
a construction project. When political leaders tried to display it again in 2000, the American Civil
Liberties Union went to court, claiming the monument was an unconstitutional endorsement of
religion. The ACLU won the case. . . .
Lawmakers passed a bill calling for the return of the monument. The same bill granted
Despite a Supreme Court ruling [Engel v. Vitale] 32 years ago that classroom prayer and
Scripture reading are unconstitutional even if they are voluntary, prayer is increasingly a part of
school activities from early-morning moments of silence to lunchtime prayer sessions to prefootball-game prayers for both players and fans.

Kentucky has been at the center of legal fights in recent years on the posting of the
commandments. In one case, McCreary County v. ACLU [2005], the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
displays inside courthouses in McCreary and Pulaski counties were unconstitutional. In another
[lower court case], Mercer County v. ACLU, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said a similar
display in the Mercer County Courthouse is constitutional because it included other historic
documents. . . .
-- Source: Ten Commandments, other issues generating debate in Ky.,
Associated Press, April 13, 2006

Question 6:
Based on this article, what is one issue in the continuing debate on separation of church and
state?
- The statue of the Ten Commandments is unconstitutional to have in a place of
law.

Document 7:
. . . along with other Warren Court decisions, Miranda has increased public awareness of
constitutional rights. The Miranda warnings may be the most famous words ever written by the

United States Supreme Court. With the widespread dissemination [distribution] of Miranda
warnings in innumerable [numerous] television shows as well as in the movies and
contemporary
fiction, the reading of the Miranda rights has become a familiar sight and sound to most
Americans; Miranda has become a household word. As Samuel Walker writes, [e]very junior
high school student knows that suspects are entitled to their Miranda rights. They often have
the details wrong, but the principle that there are limits on police officer behavior, and penalties
for breaking those rules, is firmly established. As we have seen, a national poll in 1984
revealed
that 93% of those surveyed knew that they had a right to an attorney if arrested, and a national
poll in 1991 found that 80% of those surveyed knew that they had a right to remain silent if
arrested. Perhaps it should not be surprising that, as many of my research subjects told me,
some
suspects assert their rights prior to the Miranda admonition [warning] or in situations where
police warnings are not legally required. Indeed, in the last thirty years, the Miranda rights have
been so entrenched [well-established] in American popular folklore as to become an indelible
part of our collective heritage and consciousness. . . .
-- Source: Richard A. Leo, The Impact of Miranda Revisited,
The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Spring 1996 (adapted)

Question 7:
According to Richard A. Leo, what is one effect of the Miranda decision on American society?
- It gave the people more rights and limits the power of the Police

Document 8:
. . . The familiar fact is that the vastly troubled criminal-justice system often exacts no price at
all for crime. An adult burglar has only one chance in 412 of going to jail for any single job,
according to Gregory Krohm of the Virginia Polytechnic Institutes Center for the Study of
Public Choice. For juveniles under 17, the figure is one in 659 burglaries, with a likelihood of
only a nine-month term if the 659-to-1 shot comes in. Many critics are convinced that such odds
were created in large part by those constitutional-law rulings of the Warren Court that expanded

the rights of criminal defendants. Mapp, Escobedo, Miranda and Wade* are still names that
enrage law-and-order advocates. But despite all the years of talk and four Nixon appointments,
the court has so far been willing only to trim some of the rules, not reverse them. The new
rulings
obviously add to the work of the courts, and some experts believe that they have hampered the
criminal-justice systems capacity to convict guilty offenders, though as yet there have been no
studies demonstrating any such significant damage. . . .
-- Source: The Crime Wave, Time, June 30, 1975

*In United States v. Wade (1967), the Court ruled that defendants have a right to counsel during
police lineups. This does not refer to Roe v. Wade.
Question 8:
Based on the Time article, what is one impact of the rulings of the Warren Court on crime?
- One impact would be that it seems its making it harder and harder to charge
criminals and even if they are charged then their sentence will not be sufficient enough

Document 9:
WASHINGTON Refusing to overturn more than three decades of established law
enforcement practice, the Supreme Court yesterday strongly reaffirmed its landmark Miranda
[Miranda v. Arizona] decision, which requires police to inform criminal suspects of their rights to
remain silent and to be represented by an attorney during interrogation.
In a 7-2 opinion written by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the high court ruled that the
requirement that criminal suspects be read their Miranda rights is rooted in the Constitution
and cannot be overturned by an act of Congress. Federal lawmakers passed legislation seeking
to undo the Miranda decision in 1968, two years after the ruling.
The seven justices in the majority left open the question of whether they would have reached
the
same conclusion as the original five-justice Miranda majority about the constitutional rights of
criminal suspects. But citing the courts long tradition of respect for precedent, the justices said
there were compelling reasons not to overrule it now.

Miranda has become embedded in routine police practice to the point where the warnings have
become part of our national culture, wrote Rehnquist, a frequent and vocal critic of the Miranda
decision during his earlier years on the bench. . . .
-- Source: Miranda warnings upheld, Supreme Court says right now deeply rooted,
Florida Times Union, June 27, 2000

Question 9:
Based on this article, why did the Supreme Court decide not to overturn the decision in Miranda
v. Arizona?
-

Since the original 5 justices didnt overrule it then they wouldnt out of respect

Part B: Essay
Directions: Write a well-organized essay that includes an introduction, several paragraphs, and
a conclusion. Use evidence from at least five documents in your essay. Support your response
with relevant facts, examples, and details. Include additional outside information.
Background:
Between 1953 and 1969, the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court was
Earl Warren. Supreme Court decisions made during the Warren Court era led to
significant changes in various aspects of life in the United States. Several important
court cases affected equal protection under the law, separation of church and state,
and the rights of individuals accused of crimes.
Task: Using information from the documents and your knowledge of United States history, write
an essay in which you: Discuss how decisions of the Warren Court affected
American society.
Guidelines:
In your essay, be sure to:
Develop all aspects of the task
Incorporate information from at least five documents
Incorporate relevant outside information
Support the theme with relevant facts, examples, and details
Use a logical and clear plan of organization, including an introduction and a conclusion
that are beyond a restatement of the theme

In the era that the Warren court was in his position, he made many influential decisions
on American society by his rulings in the many cases he oversaw. In this essay I will be
talking about how he has influenced us as a nation.
Over the years since we gained our independence from the British, life has
changed significantly. We have taken many steps to develop an equal and just life for
everyone who calls this place home. From the times when you were thrown in jail, no
questions asked and no fair legal process to analyze the crime you have committed, to it
being legal to own another person and call them a piece of property in the slave era, we
have made many steps in making it fair for all persons no matter your race or ethnic
belief.
One example of this would be Miranda v. Arizona. In this court case, the Warren
court ruled that you must be read your rights before you are taken into custody. This is
significant because it shows the steps being taken to make everyday encounters with
the police more safe and fair for all. Compared to how things used to be, this shows that
the Warren court has made things more fair for all.
Another example would be how the Warren court has not only addressed very
important social and racial issues, he has also addressed very important ethnic issues in
Engel v. Vitale. In this important court case, it was ruled that prayer in school, however it
may be unconstitutional, that not everyone must say it and if they dont want to say it
then they can either ignore it completely or say it in their head. This is significant
because it shows that the Warren court addresses all issues that we have as a nation.
In conclusion, the Warren court has affected American society in ways we may
never truly understand. He has made it fair for all of us. I find all of this very significant
because when the Warren court was put into power by president Eisenhower, the
president thought that he wouldnt do much in his time as the Chief Justice. But as we
have seen over the years, he has made some of the biggest decisions known to date
and without him, who knows how society would be today.