Question: Which decision occurred first, "Everson v. Board of Education" or "Rasul v. Bush"?

full_context: Document 1: Zellers v. Huff: The Dixon School Case (Zellers v. Huff) was a lawsuit started in 1948 in New Mexico contesting the use of nuns, religious brothers and priests as teachers in publicly supported schools under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case involved thirty schools in eleven New Mexico counties, twenty-eight plaintiffs, two hundred defendants, and public expenditures to the schools of over $600,000 annually. Following on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in "Everson v. Board of Education", which applied First Amendment freedoms to state as well as federal law, the Dixon School Case was the first state case to implement separation of church and state in public schools, and was watched with interest nationally.
Document 2: Brown v. Board of Education: Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. The decision overturned the "Plessy v. Ferguson" decision of 1896, which allowed state-sponsored segregation, insofar as it applied to public education. Handed down on May 17, 1954, the Warren Court's unanimous (9–0) decision stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." As a result, "de jure" racial segregation was ruled a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This ruling paved the way for integration and was a major victory of the Civil Rights Movement, and a model for many future impact litigation cases. However, the decision's fourteen pages did not spell out any sort of method for ending racial segregation in schools, and the Court's second decision in "Brown II", 349 U.S. 294 (1955) only ordered states to desegregate "with all deliberate speed".
Document 3: Combatant Status Review Tribunal: The Combatant Status Review Tribunals (CSRT) were a set of tribunals for confirming whether detainees held by the United States at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp had been correctly designated as "enemy combatants". The CSRTs were established July 7, 2004 by order of U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz after U.S. Supreme Court rulings in "Hamdi v. Rumsfeld" and "Rasul v. Bush" and were coordinated through the Office for the Administrative Review of the Detention of Enemy Combatants.
Document 4: Sahar Gul: Sahar Gul (born c.1998) is an Afghan teenager who was subjected to torture and abuse by her husband's family in the town of Puli Khumri when she was illegally married as a child bride. Her case became notable in Afghanistan and internationally when she was rescued in late 2011. "The Guardian" said that the case of Gul "horrified Afghanistan and prompted a bout of national soul-searching". Three of her in-laws were found guilty of attempted murder and sentenced to 10 years in prison, but later freed after an appeals court voided their convictions. American Attorney Kimberley Motley represented Gul in Supreme Court upon hearing of the in-laws release. Gul became the first victim of a crime that was represented by an Attorney for a criminal proceeding. In a landmark decision the Supreme Court, and after the case was decided twice by the Appellate Court, Gul's in-laws, brother and husband who were never originally tried were convicted and sentenced to five years in prison. The court also agreed that Gul could sue all parties for civil compensation. Gul is recovering in a women's shelter and says that she had ambitions to become a politician and stop other women suffering as she did.
Document 5: Epperson v. Arkansas: Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court case that invalidated an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of human evolution in the public schools. The Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a state from requiring, in the words of the majority opinion, "that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any religious sect or dogma." The Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. After this decision, some jurisdictions passed laws that required the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution was taught. These were also ruled unconstitutional by the Court in the 1987 case "Edwards v. Aguillard".
Document 6: Rapanos v. United States: Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006), was a United States Supreme Court case challenging federal jurisdiction to regulate isolated wetlands under the Clean Water Act. It was the first major environmental case heard by the newly appointed Chief Justice, John Roberts and Associate Justice, Samuel Alito. The Supreme Court heard the case on February 21, 2006 and issued a decision on June 19, 2006.
Document 7: Marsh v. Chambers: Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983), was a landmark court case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that government funding for chaplains was constitutional because of the "unique history" of the United States. Three days before the ratification of the First Amendment in 1791, containing the Establishment clause, the federal legislature authorized hiring a chaplain for opening sessions with prayer.
Document 8: Everson v. Board of Education: Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which applied the Establishment Clause in the country's Bill of Rights to State law. Prior to this decision the First Amendment words, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" imposed limits only on the federal government, while many states continued to grant certain religious denominations legislative or effective privileges. This was the first Supreme Court case incorporating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as binding upon the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision in "Everson" marked a turning point in the interpretation and application of disestablishment law in the modern era.
Document 9: Barron v. Baltimore: Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 243 (1833), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which helped define the concept of federalism in US constitutional law. The Court established a precedent that the Bill of Rights did not apply to the state governments.
Document 10: Rasul v. Bush: Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004) , was landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that foreign nationals held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp could petition federal courts for writs of "habeas corpus" to review the legality of their detention. The Court's 6–3 judgment on June 28, 2004, reversed a D.C. Circuit decision joined by Judge Merrick Garland, which had held that the judiciary has no jurisdiction to hear any petitions from foreign nationals held in Guantanamo Bay.
Document 11: Agostini v. Felton: Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203 (1997) , is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, the Court overruled its decision in "Aguilar v. Felton" (1985), now finding that it was not a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment for a state-sponsored education initiative to allow public school teachers to instruct at religious schools, so long as the material was secular and neutral in nature and no "excessive entanglement" between government and religion was apparent. This case is noteworthy in a broader sense as a sign of evolving judicial standards surrounding the First Amendment, and the changes that have occurred in modern Establishment Clause jurisprudence.
Document 12: Khairullah Khairkhwa: Khirullah Said Wali Khairkhwa is a Taliban official and former governor of Herat. He was held in the United States Guantanamo Bay detainment camp in Cuba. He was released in late May 2014 in a prisoner exchange that involved Bowe Bergdahl and the Taliban five. Press reports have referred to him as ""Mullah"" and ""Maulavi"", two different honorifics for referring to senior Muslim clerics.
Document 13: Khalid al-Odah: Khalid al-Odah is the father of Guantanamo Bay detainee, Fawzi al-Odah, and the founder of the Kuwaiti Family Committee, a group established in 2004 to heighten global awareness of the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Over the past five years, Khalid has waged legal, media, and public relations campaigns to promote the need for due process for the prisoners at Guantanamo. In 2004, Khalid brought his son's case to the Supreme Court Rasul v. Bush/ al-Odah v. Bush.
Document 14: Slaughter-House Cases: The Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873) , was the first United States Supreme Court interpretation of the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment which had recently been enacted. It was a pivotal case in early civil rights law and held that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the privileges or immunities of citizenship of the United States, not privileges and immunities of citizenship of a state. However, federal rights of citizenship were then few, such as the right to travel between states and to use navigable rivers; the amendment did not protect the far broader range of rights covered by state citizenship. In effect, the amendment was interpreted to convey limited protection pertinent to a small minority of rights.
Document 15: Taliban Five: The Taliban Five were long-term Afghan detainees at Guantanamo Bay and formerly high-ranking members of the Taliban government of Afghanistan who, after being held indefinitely without charges, were exchanged for United States Army sergeant Bowe Bergdahl.
ground_truth: Everson v. Board of Education