Question: Which of the following landmark cases was tried in the Supreme Court: Agostini v. Felton or Canterbury v. Spence?

<P0-S0> Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203 (1997) , is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. <P0-S1>  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. <P0-S2>  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. <SEP> <P1-S0> Constitutional colorblindness is an aspect of United States Supreme Court case evaluation that began with Justice Harlan's dissent in "Plessy v. Ferguson "in 1896. <P1-S1>  Prior to this (and for a good while afterwards), the Supreme Court considered color as a determining factor in many landmark cases. <P1-S2>  Constitutional colorblindness holds that skin color or race is virtually never a legitimate ground for legal or political distinctions, and thus, any law that is "color conscious" is presumptively unconstitutional regardless of whether its intent is to subordinate a group, or remedy discrimination. <P1-S3>  The concept, therefore, has been brought to bear both against vestiges of Jim Crow oppression, as well as remedial efforts aimed at overcoming such discrimination, such as affirmative action. <SEP> <P2-S0> Canterbury v. Spence (464 F.2d. <P2-S1>  772, 782 D.C. Cir. <P2-S2>  1972) was a landmark federal case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that significantly reshaped malpractice law in the United States. <P2-S3>  It established the idea of "informed consent" to medical procedures. <SEP> <P3-S0> Stephen P. Halbrook is a Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute and an author and lawyer known for his litigation on behalf of the National Rifle Association. <P3-S1>  He has written extensively about the original meanings of the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment (the latter as applied to Second Amendment rights). <P3-S2>  He has argued and won three cases before the US Supreme Court: "Printz v. United States", "United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Company", and "Castillo v. United States". <P3-S3>  He has also written briefs in many other cases, including the Supreme Court cases "Small v. United States" (pertaining to the Gun Control Act of 1968) and "McDonald v. Chicago". <P3-S4>  In "District of Columbia v. Heller", he wrote a brief on behalf of the majority of both houses of Congress. <P3-S5>  More broadly, his decades of research on the Second Amendment contributed to the intellectual foundation of the "Heller" decision. <P3-S6>  He has written many books and articles on the topic of gun control, some of which have been cited in Supreme Court opinions ("Heller", "McDonald", "Printz v. United States"). <P3-S7>  He has testified before congress on multiple occasions. <P3-S8>  Halbrook’s most important scholarly contribution, however, was the book "That Every Man Be Armed", originally published in 1986. <P3-S9>  The book was the most thorough analysis of the legal history and original intent of the Second Amendment.