Today is Law Day, an annual national observance of the effect of the rule of law on American society. Law Day is an opportunity for all citizens to celebrate the liberties offered by democracy and to encourage deeper understanding of the legal system. The American Bar Association (ABA) recognizes Law Day each year by developing programs and activities centered around a theme that reflects the importance of the rule of law in society.
This year’s theme, “Voices of Democracy,” highlights the importance of citizens’ participation in a functioning democracy. In 2024, the United States will hold its 60th presidential election. The following is a statement from American Bar Association President Mary Smith to commemorate the theme of this year’s Law Day:
Law Day is a special day of celebration by the people of the United States in appreciation of our liberties as well as a day that seeks to cultivate respect for the rule of law that is so vital to our democratic way of life. On this particular Law Day, however, we find our system of laws as well as our very democracy under great strain. It is incredibly important, therefore, that all lawyers, and indeed all Americans, use their voices on this May 1st to stand up for the rule of law and for our cherished American democracy and to work to ensure that they continue to endure.
Democracy is defined as a form of government where the people rule or have a say in the decisions that affect them. The ABA Rule of Law Democracy Programs offer initiatives dedicated to advancing democratic values and principles and programs to empower individuals and communities in upholding the pillars of democracy. The “pillars” of democracy are loosely defined, but may include:
To celebrate Law Day, the Harris County Robert W. Hainsworth Law Library will feature an exhibit throughout the month of May that highlights landmark court cases related to the exercise of democratic liberties, including the right to participate in representative elections and to exercise freedom of speech, as well as provides further resources to research current issues affecting our democracy. To learn more, browse previous Ex Libris Juris blog posts on past observances of Law Day.
The Houston Bar Association hosts an annual contest in observance of Law Day. Click here to see the 2024 Law Day Contest winners of the Essay, Photography, Poster, and Special Needs Team Poster categories.
Landmark Cases
United States v. Reese (1876)
In January of 1873, William Garner, an African American, was denied the right to vote in a municipal election in Lexington, Kentucky. Election inspectors Hiram Reese and Matthew Foushee claimed Garner had failed to pay a tax of $1.50, but Garner had previously attempted to pay the tax and was refused by a tax collector. The Enforcement Act of 1870, which defined penalties associated with violations of voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment, stipulated that if an official refused to permit a citizen to perform an action required for voting, the citizen could present an affidavit that would qualify him. Reese and Foushee refused to accept Garner's affidavit. Reese and Foushee were charged with violating the Enforcement Act. On appeal, the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kentucky found the relevant sections of the Enforcement Act too broad, exceeding the bounds of the Fifteenth Amendment, and dismissed the indictments. In an 8-1 decision authored by Chief Justice Morrison Waite, the Court concluded that the relevant sections of the Enforcement Act lacked the necessary, limiting language to qualify as enforcement of the Fifteenth Amendment.
Bush v. Gore (2000)
Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, and concurrent with Vice President Al Gore's contest of the certification of Florida presidential election results, on December 8, 2000 the Florida Supreme Court ordered that the Circuit Court in Leon County tabulate by hand 9000 contested ballots from Miami-Dade County. It also ordered that every county in Florida must immediately begin manually recounting all "under-votes" (ballots which did not indicate a vote for president) because there were enough contested ballots to place the outcome of the election in doubt. Governor George Bush and his running mate, Richard Cheney, filed a request for review in the U.S. Supreme Court and sought an emergency petition for a stay of the Florida Supreme Court's decision. The U.S. Supreme Court granted review and issued the stay on December 9. It heard oral argument two days later. The Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore was among the most controversial in U.S. history, as it allowed the vote certification made by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris to stand, giving Bush Florida's 25 electoral votes. Florida's votes gave Bush, the Republican nominee, 271 electoral votes, one more than the 270 required to win the Electoral College. This meant the defeat of Democratic candidate Al Gore, who won 267 electoral votes but received 266, as a "faithless elector" from the District of Columbia abstained from voting.
Trump v. United States (2024)
Former President Donald Trump was indicted in August 2023 on four counts arising from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the January 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. Capitol. Trump claimed that he cannot be prosecuted for his official acts as president and that a former president cannot be prosecuted unless he has first been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan initially set Trump’s trial for March 4, 2024, but later vacated this date pending resolution of Trump’s immunity claims. Judge Chutkan denied Trump’s motion to dismiss on immunity grounds, and Smith asked the Supreme Court directly to expedite review and bypass a decision by the D.C. Circuit. The Court declined, deferring instead to the D.C. Circuit’s judgment. On February 6, the D.C. Circuit upheld Chutkan’s decision, and Trump requested a stay of the D.C. Circuit’s ruling. Ultimately, the Supreme Court decided to expedite the case, and oral arguments were heard at the high court on April 25, 2024.
Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt. Photo courtesy of the ACLU.
In December 1965, a group of students in Des Moines held a meeting in the home of 16-year-old Christopher Eckhardt to plan a public showing of their support for a truce in the Vietnam war. They decided to wear black armbands throughout the holiday season and to fast on December 16 and New Year's Eve. The principals of the Des Moines school learned of the plan and met on December 14 to create a policy that stated that any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it, with refusal to do so resulting in suspension. On December 16, Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore their armbands to school and were sent home. The following day, John Tinker did the same with the same result. The students did not return to school until after New Year's Day, the planned end of the protest. Through their parents, the students sued the school district for violating the students' right of expression and sought an injunction to prevent the school district from disciplining the students. The district court dismissed the case and held that the school district's actions were reasonable to uphold school discipline. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the decision without opinion. A tie vote in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit meant that the U.S. District Court's decision continued to stand, which forced the Tinkers and Eckhardts to appeal to the Supreme Court directly. The court's 7–2 decision held that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and that administrators would have to demonstrate constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom.
Mckesson v. Doe (2024)
Mckesson v. Doe was brought by a Baton Rouge, Louisiana police officer against DeRay Mckesson, a prominent civil rights activist. The officer claimed that Mckesson should be liable for personal injuries he suffered after an unknown individual — not Mckesson — threw a “rock-like” object at the officer during a 2016 protest of the killing of Alton Sterling by Baton Rouge police. Though presented to the United States Supreme Court, the high court decided to not hear the case at this time, and left in place the opinion by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fifth Circuit opinion held that a protest organizer could be liable for the independent, violent actions of others present at a protest based on a showing of negligence.
In the News
The year of 2024 brings many challenges to democracy and its principles. Use these trusted, nonpartisan resources to stay on top of current events related to voter rights, elections, and civil liberties.
SCOTUSblog - Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court
Online Resources for Searching United States Supreme Court Cases