Gitlow v New York, a case involving the publication of "Left Wing Manifesto," a paper urging general strikes and critical of moderates who would seek changes only through the ballot box. The Court upholds Gitlow's conviction, but significantly the Court agrees with Gitlow's position that states (as well as the federal government) are bound to comply with the commands of the First Amendment, as the protections have been "incorporated" through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Papers revealed that the U.S. had deliberately expanded its war with bombing of Cambodia and Laos, coastal raids on North Vietnam, and Marine Corps attacks, none of which had been reported by media in the US. The most damaging revelations in the papers revealed that four administrations, from Truman to Johnson, had misled the public regarding their intentions. For example, the John F. Kennedy administration had planned to overthrow South Vietnamese leader Ngo Dinh Diem before his death in a November 1963 coup. President Johnson had decided to expand the war while promising "we seek no wider war" during his 1964 presidential campaign, including plans to bomb North Vietnam well before the 1964 Election. President Johnson had been outspoken against doing so during the election and claimed that his opponent Barry Goldwater was the one that wanted to bomb North Vietnam.In another example, a memo from the Defense Department under the Johnson Administration listed the reasons for American persistence:
Parks and Demonstrations
Originally 12amendmentsand ten pass.Passed Later? Varying compensation for congress (1992).What didn’t? Number of reps per state.
In Barron v. Baltimore (1833), theCourt held that the Bill of Rights didnot apply to state laws. With thepassage of the FourteenthAmendment in 1868, the Courtbegan to apply the Bill of Rights tothe states. Section I of theFourteenth Amendment reads “NoState shall…deprive any person oflife, liberty or property, without dueprocess of law.” 14th Amendment
With the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the Courtbegan to apply the Bill of Rights to the states. Section I of theFourteenth Amendment reads “No State shall…deprive any person oflife, liberty or property, without due process of law.” 14th Amendment
“No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty or property,without due process of law.” 14th Amendment - 2
Gitlow v. New York (1925) theCourt held that theFourteenth Amendmentprotected the freedom ofspeechIncorporation Theory—theview that most of theprotections of the Bill of Rightsapply to state governmentsthrough the FourteenthAmendment’s due processclause.
“No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty orproperty, without due process of law.” 14th Amendment - 3
Establishment Clause—the part ofthe First Amendment prohibitingthe establishment of a churchofficially supported by the nationalgovernment. It is applied toquestions of the legality of givingstate and local government aid toreligious organizations and schools,allowing or requiring schoolprayers, and teaching evolutionversus intelligent design.
Free Exercise Clause—the provision of the firstAmendment guaranteeing the free exercise ofreligion. The provision constrains the nationalgovernment from prohibiting individuals frompracticing the religion of their choice. Religion and the Presidency
School Vouchers Originated in Ohio and currently ten states allow public funds to be used for private education. Bush supported Obama Opposes
Engel v. Vitale (1962)—The State Board of Regents were challenged on the generic prayer spoken aloud in pubic schools. Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) outlawed the Lord’s prayer. States have interpreted momentAP Photo/The Lufkin Daily News, Joel Andrews of silence in public schools as long as the purpose is secular.
Epperson v. Arkansas (1968),the Supreme Court held thatthe Arkansas law prohibitingthe teaching of evolutionviolated the establishmentclause, imposing religiousbeliefs on students. To avoidlawsuits, school districtsemploy ambiguous language,focusing on the strengths andweaknesses when discussingevolution.
Both born in NJ to first generation immigrants Both Roman Catholic Both graduated from Harvard Both appointed byWilliam J. Republican Presidents AntoninBrennan Scalia Easy Senate Confirmations
“The genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning in may have had in a world that is dead and gone,” he wrote in a 1997 essay, “but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and present needs.” He saw the animating spirit of the Constitution as the protection of the dignity of the individual against the power of majoritarian government. At the Supreme Court, BrennanWilliam J. cheerfully and tirelessly lobbied fellow justicesBrennan for the extra votes needed to win a victory for free speech, defendant’s rights, or a broader vision of equal rights. Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html
Insists that the Constitution’s meaning wasdetermined by the “original intent” of its draftersand ratifiers— a “frozen” and limitingdocument. He so aggressively promotes hisconservative views on issues before the Court thathe oftentimes alienates the very justices whosevotes might have tipped a case in his favoreddirection. Steven Shapiro, national legal directorof the ACLU, observed, “I think he is one justicewho thinks his influence is not putting together Antonin Scaliamajorities today but influencing historytomorrow.” In oral arguments, the combativeScalia frequently asked more questions than theother eight justices put together. Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html
The Court announced its decision in Edwards v Aguillard on June 19, 1987. Writing for the Court, Justice Brennan said the state failed to identify a “clear secular purpose” for the Act, as required by the Constitution. Brennan concluded that Louisiana’s stated goal of protecting “academic freedom” was a sham. The real goal, as he saw it, “was to narrow the science curriculum.” Justice Scalia, in a typically colorful dissent joined by ChiefWilliam J. Justice Rehnquist, accused Brennan and theBrennan majority of deciding constitutional issues “on the gallop” and “impugning the motives” of the law’s supporters. Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html
As far as the Constitution is concerned, Scaliainsisted, all that matters is that legislators sincerelybelieved that creation science was scientific. It isnot necessary, for constitutional purposes, thattheir collective assessment was right. If alegislature full of ignoramuses requires geographyteachers to teach that the earth is flat, it is a sorrystate of affairs—but not an unconstitutional one.Moreover, the fact that many supporters of the lawmight also have had religious motivations is of no Antonin Scaliaconcern. Scalia noted that the Court would never“strike down a law providing money to feed thehungry or shelter the homeless” just becauselegislators might have had religious beliefs thatinfluenced their decision. Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html
In Pleasant Grove City v.Summum (2009), theSupreme Court ruled thatby acceptingmonuments, the City ofPleasant Gove wasexercising its ownfreedom of speech,rather than regulatingthe speech of others. AP Photo/Al Behrman
The Free ExerciseClause Individuals may hold any religious beliefs and practices, but if it works against public policy and public welfare, the government can act.
Churches and otherreligious organizations aretax exempt and cannotendorse candidates ormake politicalcontributionsThey are allowed to takeballot positions. California Proposition 8 opposition paid for by Mormons and Roman Catholics.
Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Symbolic SpeechCommercial SpeechPermitted restrictionson free speechObscenityHate speech Supreme Court 1st Amendment – Jon Stewart
In the New York Times v.United States (1971), theCourt ruled that thePentagon Papers hadthe right to be publishedand that thegovernment carries theburden of showingjustification for theenforcement of such arestraint.
Symbolic Speech—Expressions made througharticles of clothing, gestures,movements, and otherforms of nonverbal conductare free speech. Establishedin Tinker v. Des MoinesSchool District (1969).The government can banforms, but must prove John Tinker, 15, & Christopher Eckhardt, 16intimidation, and cannotinfer it from the action
Advertising hasincreasingly been given 1stAmendment protection.Restriction is valid as longas it Seeks to implement a substantial government interest directly advances that interest, and goes no further than necessary to accomplish its objective.
Slander The public uttering of a false statement that harms the good reputation of another. The statement must be made to, or within the hearing of, persons other than the defamed party.
Student Speech Rights of Public School Students College Student Activity Fees Campus Speech and Behavior CodesAP Photo/The Arizona Daily Wildcat,Roxana Vasquez
Defamation in writing Libel—a written defamation of a person’s character, reputation, business or property rights. New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), the Supreme Court held when a statement against a public official was made with actual malice, damages could be obtained.
Gag Orders Courts have upheld gag orders when necessary to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trail.
Movies – selfregulating.FCC (1934)created toregulate theelectronicairwaves
In the 1960’s theCourt interpreted theright to privacy in the1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 9thamendments.1973 Roe v. Wadewas considered aprivacy issue forwomen.
Privacy Act of 1974. The first comprehensive legislation regulating the use of federal government information and private citizens.
80’s-90’s moreconservativecourt. Abortion regulations vary by state. Clinic violence buffer zones Limiting abortion rights.
The right todieRovingwiretapsWarrantsPatriot Act
The rights of theaccused (4th, 5th, 6thand 8th amendments).Miranda v. ArizonaThe death penalty