The Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison (1803) centered around Secretary of State James Madison trying to block the appointment of certain court justices even though they had been approved by the Senate. The Court's ruling established several different precedents, but by far the most important was that the Court had the right to overturn acts of Congress and deem them unconstitutional. This was not a power explicitly given to the Supreme Court in the Constitution, and the decision was highly controversial at the time.

In 1816, Congress wanted to create a national bank in the United States. However, many states disagreed with this decision because creating a national bank led to economic depression. Thus, Maryland passed laws placing a tax on the bank, but a cashier with the bank (James McCulloch) refused to pay the tax. When this case reached the Supreme Court, the Court decided that although the Constitution did not explicitly allow Congress to create a national bank, it did allow Congress to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers," a clause found in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. This is known as the "necessary and proper" clause, allowing the federal government to create the bank.

Marbury v. Madison created judicial review. Miranda v. Arizona created Miranda rights. Both Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education involved the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In Goss v. Lopez the Supreme Court ruled that states that provide free education for all cannot deprive the right to due process from its students. Miranda v. Arizona established that people must be read their rights at the time of an arrest. Engle v. Vitale prohibited prayer in schools. Grutter v. Bollinger allowed colleges to promote diversity.

In the Supreme Court decision Fletcher v. Peck, the Court found that Georgia’s voided laws that had, when enacted, granted Peck land were not constitutionally allowed to nullify the land deal between Peck and Fletcher. This deal had occurred years after Peck’s original acquisition. The Court noted that bills of attainder and ex post facto laws are unconstitutional, so the legal sale of the estate from Peck to Fletcher was constitutional. This invalidated Georgia’s legislation.

Habeas corpus is protection from unlawful imprisonment, and does not relate to this case.

Gideon v. Wainwright \[somewhat\] famously incorporated the 6th Amendment's guarantee of representation even to those who cannot afford it (so-called indigent ("poor") counsel). There's also a movie about this case called "Gideon's Trumpets."

The answer, "the right to be represented by the best . . ." may sound tempting, but it is not true. The state must provide you with counsel if you cannot afford it (if you want it, that is), but there's no requirement that your representation be the best.

The other answers are different Amendments that were not relevant to the case.

The Supreme Court determined that Johnson was protected under his 1st Amendment right of free expression, especially because his act was inherently political. It is not in the hands of officials to determine the sanctity of symbols, as that would go directly against the 1st Amendment. Neither disgust nor disapproval constitutes enough legal weight to restrict expressiveness.

The Warren Court did establish the right to privacy through its 1965 decision in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, but Warren had retired by 1973 when the court, led by Chief Justice Warren Burger, made the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.

The Supreme Court case of Cooper v. Ohio (1958) revolved around the issue of segregation in the South, particularly the attempts by some Southern authorities to continue segregation even after the landmark ruling of Brown v. Board of Education. In Cooper v. Aaron, the Supreme Court ruled that the States were bound by the decisions of the Supreme Court and could not nullify the decisions of the Federal courts.

In the Supreme Court decision McCulloch v. Maryland, the Court found that Maryland did not have the power to tax the national government. Congress has enumerated powers spelled out in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, and the Supreme Court expounded on the unenumerated, or non-disclosed powers Congress also possesses.

The police admitted that the search was illegal in this instance, even though they discovered obscene materials and charged Mapp with a crime. The appellant, Mapp, argued to the Supreme Court that it was a situation where expressing herself in her own privacy was protected by the 1st Amendment, but the Court ruled in her favor through the 4th Amendment. The 4th Amendment protects against unlawful search and seizure, and bestows the right of security in one’s home. The exclusionary rule allows for much evidence to be ruled inadmissible as evidence in court.