This is a difficult question. Although your first impression may have been to select the “Death penalty,” that answer in incorrect. In fact, none of the answers are correct. Although the Supreme Court effectively forbade the death penalty for about four years in Furman v. Georgia (holding that the death penalty as applied was unconstitutional), the key part of that holding was “as applied.” Thus, when Georgia rearranged their penalty scheme, the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty in Gregg v. Georgia, which has not been overturned. Thus the death penalty is not an unconstitutional restriction of 8th amendment rights.

This is a relatively obscure question, as the 9th Amendment is rarely litigated, but the correct answer is the 9th Amendment. The text of the Amendment reads: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Thus, the 9th Amendment stands for the proposition that the Constitution is not the sum of all rights—it simply mentions some. In other words, it would technically be a violation of the 9th Amendment to deny a historical right based on the fact that it is not specifically listed in the constitution.

The correct answer is the Tenth Amendment. The Tenth Amendment is often called the “states’ rights amendment” because it grants to the states any rights (1) not specifically granted to the federal government and (2) not forbidden to the states. The Tenth Amendment is a broad and sweeping statement of federalism, although challenges under the 10th rarely gain traction (the potent combination of the Supremacy Clause and Interstate Commerce Clause tend to overwhelm the 10th).

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.

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.

Clarence Gideon was charged by the State of Florida with grand larceny, but was specifically denied an attorney by the court. Gideon appealed to the Supreme Court on his own from prison with a pencil and prison stationary, and the Supreme Court appointed him an attorney so that his case could be heard. The Supreme Court held that under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, all states must provide counsel to those who could not afford it in all such criminal cases.

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) relates to the Second Amendment’s protection of an American citizen's’ right to carry a firearm. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment allows an American citizen to carry a firearm in a Federal enclave, or in his or her own private property.

The Supreme Court case, Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), was an extremely important case in the build-up to the Civil War. It was presided over by Chief Justice Roger Taney, who delivered the verdict that not only could Scott not sue in a Federal court, due to his being black and thus not being a citizen, but also that the government had no right to regulate the extension of slavery into the territories. Not surprisingly, the verdict inspired widespread outrage among abolitionist parties in the North and furthered the divide between the North and the South.

The Supreme Court case, Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), centered around a Connecticut law that prevented anyone from using any drug to prevent conception. The Supreme Court ruled against the state of Connecticut and decided that the government had no right to regulate contraception because it violated the rights to individual and marital privacy—a right not explicitly stated in the Constitution, but one the Court inferred from other protections established in the Constitution.

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.