osition the new justice may not share the same views as the previous one. Also, new developments occur with the passing of time, which may cause a change in attitudes and feelings bringing about new concerns on an issue. (3)One Supreme Court reversal with far reaching consequences involved the Courts interpretation of whether the Bill of Rights protected citizens from state, as well as national violations. In 1833 case of Barron v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, the Court ruled that the Bill of Rights could only be applied to strike down illegal actions taken by national government. (3)This interpretation was first seriously challenged after the Civil War, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. Congressman John A. Bingham, the chief author of this Amendment, said that due process and equal protection clauses were intended to guard the rights of all citizens against state violations. Nevertheless, for many more years to come the Supreme Court still held to its constricted view and did not extend the Bill of Rights to State offences. (3)Finally, in 1925, the Court began to change its position on this issue in the landmark case Gitlow v. New York. When the Supreme Court announced its decision and declared that freedom of speech and freedom of the press, are also among the fundamental personal rights and liberties protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States. (3)In 1954, a landmark segregation case came before the Supreme Court. Black students had been denied admission to all-white schools in Topeka, Kansas; under Kansas law, cities with more than 15.000 residents it was acceptable to operate separate school systems, providing that both schools were substantially equal in educational facilities. But in Brown v. Board of Education Topeka, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that segregation by race in public schools is unconstitutional. Speaking for the Court, Chief Justice Earl Warr...
