1. The document provides a hypothetical case involving a political candidate, Gloria Santos, who is facing opposition through an attack website and wants it shut down. It poses four questions analyzing different First Amendment issues that could arise. 2. The questions examine whether a judge can order the attack website shut down, if Santos' supporters can hold a political rally on a university campus, if Santos could be arrested for sedition after calling for political revolution, and if a man can be arrested for fighting words at the rally. 3. The document instructs the reader to identify the relevant area of law, apply legal rules to the facts of each question, and explain their conclusion on the constitutionality of the hypothetical situations.

1. COM 440POL S 461 Assignment
1 Spring 2016
Click Link Below To Buy:
https://hwaid.com/shop/com-440pol-s-461-assignment-1-spring-2016-2/
Contact Us:
hwaidservices@gmail.com
COM 440POL S 461 Assignment1 Spring 2016
Assignment1:Case Problems Involving the FirstAmendment
COM 440/POL S 461 Assignment1:Spring 2016
One of the bestways to learn the rules oflaw is to apply them to hypothetical situations.That’s why I’m asking you to
analyze one case problem with several parts involving material discussed in Lessons 1 and 2 (including the
discussion forums) and chapters 1 -3 of the textbook. Please refer to Practice Exercise 2-2 for examples ofthis type
of legal analysis.
The first step is to read the facts of the case problem carefullyand e-mail me ifyou have any questions.The next
step is to identify the correct area (or category) of law that is applicable to each question ofthe case problem.In other
words,does the question deal with sedition or fighting words or prior restraintor time,place and manner rules or
another area (or category) of law covered in Lesson 2? This partof the analysis is essential because the legal rules
differ depending on the area of law under consideration.Once you determine the area/category of law that’s
applicable (and sometimes it’s given),then the laststep is to apply the correct legal rules to the facts of the case
problem and to state your conclusions.Here’s the case hypothetical,followed by instructions on how to prepare your
assignment.
Case Hypothetical
Let’s assume thatGloria Santos is the Green Party nominee,campaigning for the open congressional seatheld by
Representative Jim McDermott,who decided notto run for re- election this year. People opposing her candidacy
have already created a website dedicated to her defeat. The website’s domain name is
GloriaSantosforCongress.com,and itis the first website thatcomes up in an Internet search for information about her
candidacy. The website labels her a Communistand includes false statements abouther positions on the
environment,workers’ rights,low-income housing and police accountability,among other issues.The website also
attacks her character and fitness to hold political office, calling her a liar, a thief and an illegal immigrant.It promises
to publish detailed accounts ofher anti-business policies and illegal activities throughoutthe campaign season.
Gloria Santos and her supporters are outraged and contactthe city prosecutor,who is her friend, asking for his help
in shutting down the website.The city prosecutor asks a local judge to order the website’s creator to shutdown the
website immediatelybefore mostvoters become aware of it because ofits lies,deception and character
assassination.
1. Would such an order be constitutional? In other words,should the local judge,using equitylaw, order the website’s
creator to shutdown the website? First,identify the specific area (category) of law that directly relates to this
situation;second,
identify the theory or interpretation of the First Amendmentthatis most
applicable to this type of situation;third, apply the relevant legal rules;and,
fourth, explain your conclusion.(35 points)

2. Continuing this case hypothetical,let’s assume thatGloria Santos’ supporters wantto hold a political rallyin Red
Square on the UW-Seattle campus from noon to 1 p.m.on Monday, Memorial Day. They asked the appropriate
university administrators for a permit,and some administrators expressed concern thatpeople would assume thatthe
university was supporting her candidacyif they allowed the political rallyin Red Square.
2. Should university administrators allow this political rally? In other words,would this political rallybe constitutionally
protected under the First Amendment? First,identify the specific area (category) of law that relates to this situation;
second,applythe correct legal rules to the facts of the case problem;and,third,explain your conclusion.(25 pts)
Let’s assume Santos’ supporters did hold the political rally,and Santos spoke at it. During her speech,she called for
a political revolution where ordinary citizens would unite to overthrow the billionaires and capitalists who control this
country’s economyand political system.Several opponents to her candidacy attended the rally and were offended by
her call for a revolution. One man shouted thatshe and her supporters should be arrested for sedition because they
were advocating the overthrow of the U.S. governmentand the country’s economic system.
3. Should Santos and her supporters be arrested for sedition? In other words,would such arrests be constitutional?
Please applythe correct legal rules and explain your conclusion.(20 pts)
Another man yelled that Santos was a dangerous Communistand would be a threat to the Seattle way of life if she
were elected to Congress.He then tried to push his way to the podium,and when two of her supporters stopped him,
he screamed insults directlyat them for several minutes.Several bystanders urged police officers on the scene to
arrestthe man for fighting words.
4. Should the police arrestthe man for fighting words under these circumstances? In other words,would such arrests
be constitutional? Please applythe correct legal rules and explain your conclusion.(20 pts)
Here’s how to prepare and submityour assignment.
1. Create a Word documentand enter your full name at the beginning ofyour assignment.
2. Begin each of your answers with the specific question number thatyou’re answering.For example,when you
answer question 1,please startyour answer with “Question 1.” or 1. This will help me grade your assignment.
3. Refer back to the question after you finish a draft of your answer to make s ure that you answered the question
completelyand didn’tget side tracked into discussing other unrelated areas ofmedia law.
4. Proofread carefully (double-check spelling,grammar,accuracy).
5. Upload your assignmentto the website.You are responsible for making sure thatyour assignmentis posted on the
website by the deadline so please double check
that it uploaded successfully.If you have trouble uploading your assignment,
please e-mail me before the deadline.
6. Save a copy of your work in case something happens to the uploaded file.
i can give a example for this type of legal analysis
1. The studenteditor of theMountain High Gazette, a monthlynewspaper published in printand online as partof a
journalism class atthe local public school,has written a thoughtful article aboutabortion and teenage pregnancy.The
article includes interviews with two current students,each ofwhom describes her problems as a teenage mother and
full-time student.Italso contains an interview with a third studentwho talks about her decision to have an abortion.All
three students are willing to be identified in the article. The article is balanced and carefully researched.The faculty
adviser approves the contents of the article, but the principal overrules his decision,saying the article is inappropriate
for a school paper and should notbe published.The principal fears thatthe students named in the story will be bullied
by other students and harshlycriticized by parents.The students identified wantto share their s tories to help other
young people in similar situations.The studenteditor believes thatthe principal is violating her FirstAmendment
rights by censoring the story. Does the principal have the authority to stop the publication of the article? Why or why
not?
2. Assume thata city council in Washington State has adopted the following ordinance:“The mayor shall have the
authority to impose reasonable restrictions on groups thatuse the city’s parks for activities critical of the U.S. military.”
Would this ordinance be constitutional? Why or why not?
Answer:
1. With any type of legal analysis,it’s importantto address all ofthe elements before reaching a conclusion.In a case
involving censorship ofa studentnewspaper and website,the firstquestion that should be asked is:“Is the
newspaper/website published ata public or private high school?” The second question,assuming it’s a public school,
is “what kind of newspaper/website is it?” In this case problem,the facts state thatMountain High Gazette is a public
school and that the newspaper/website is partofa journalism class.Given these facts, theHazelwood ruling
applies,which gives school administrators the authorityto censor studentmedia for whatthe courts have broadly
defined as “legitimate pedagogical concerns.” It is likely that the principal does have the authority to censor the
article.
2. This is an example of time,place, and manner restrictions.The first step is to determine the type of forum. Courts
have ruled that public parks are considered traditional public forums.Given that designation,you then need to apply
the test for evaluating time,place and manner restrictions to the ordinance.The criteria are as follows:1) the rule
mustbe content neutral;2)the rule mustnot constitute a complete ban on communication;3) the rule mustbe justified

3. by a substantial state interest;and 4) the rule mustbe narrowly tailored.The ordinance is notconstitutional for many
reasons.First,it is not contentneutral because itlimits onlyspeech and activities critical of the U.S.military. Second,
it is overly broad because itlimits activities in all public parks.Third, the city has not demonstrated thatit serves a
substantial state interest.Fourth, it’s vague because itdoesn’tdefine whatactivities are covered and what constitutes
a group;and it gives too much discretion to the mayor to determine whatwould be a “reasonable restriction” in
administering the law.