Chapters 1 - 7 Flashcards
Values of Free Speech
1) The Discovery of truth
2) The Continuance of Self-Government
3) A Check on Government Power
4) A Promotion of Stable Change
5) Individual Fulfillment
Checks for the First Amendment
Bad Tendency Test
Clear and Present Danger
Balancing Test
Strict Scrutiny
Bad Tendency Test
Does the speech in question have the tendency to cause or incite harm?
Clear and Present Danger
Does the speech in question have the tendency to incite immediate action which would be harmful?
1) Who is the speaker? Have they been affiliated with certain organizations? What are their credentials?
2)
Gitlow v. New York (1925)
States cannot restrict freedoms that the constitution provides.
Brandeburg v. Ohio (1969)
The advocacy of illegal activity is not illegal unless such speech has the tendency to cause immediate harm or incite reactions which would be harmful.
Hazelwood v. Kulmeier (1988)
Student’s first amendment rights do not cover speech made through school sponsored activities such as the school newspaper.
Wooley v. Maynard (1977)
Illegal for states to force citizens to display the state’s motto on their license plates.
Virginia v. Black (2003)
Certain expressions are not covered under the first amendment if the intent to intimidate is proven.
O’Brien v. United States (1st Cir. 1967)
Ruled that a criminal prohibition against burning a draft card did not violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech.
Cohen v. California (1971)
1) States cannot censor their citizens in order to make a “civil” society.
2) Knowing where to draw the line between harmless heightened emotion and vulgarity can be difficult.
3) People bring passion to politics and vulgarity is simply a side effect of a free exchange of ideas—no matter how radical they may be.
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)
Created the fighting words doctrine, which is a limitation on the first amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech.
Terminiello v. Chicago (1949)
Fighting words must be targeted at individuals; words spoken at groups cannot be fighting words.
You are not responsible for the actions of those who listen to your speech. If you praise god and they go and burn an atheist’s house, it’s not your fault.
Snyder v. Phelps (2011)
Public protest on public grounds cannot be liable for a tort of emotional distress.
Near v. Minnesota (1931)
Recognized freedom of the press and roundly rejected prior restraint on publications.
Grosjean v. American Press Co., Inc. (1936)
The Supreme Court held that corporations were “persons” for purposes of analysis under the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the 14th Amendment, preventing taxation on specific publications.
New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)
Allowed the NY Times and Washington Post to publish the Pentagon Papers without government censorship.
Preserved the rights of the press to print information despite the executive authority of the president.
Abrams v. United States (1919)
Speech that urges the curtailment of wartime supplies is unconstitutional.
Schenck v. United States (1919)
Established the clear and present danger test.
Speech that encourages resistance to the draft was deemed illegal.
Nebraska Press Ass’n v. Stuart (1976)
Rejected the prior restraint of a media coverage during criminal trials.
Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)
Nudity is not necessarily obscene if it is artistic or intellectual in nature.
Justice Potter Stewart said what famous quote?
Justice Potter Stewart - I’ll know it when I see it.
Miller v. California (1973)
Case where the courts defined it’s standard for obscenity to be “utterly without socially redeeming value” to that that lacks “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”
Also known as the Miller Test.
Jenkins v. Georgia (1974)
Establish regulation for the depiction of sexual conduct and the presence of nudity alone does not constitute obscene material.
Stanley v. Georgia (1968)
The possession of pornography is not illegal.
Reno v. ACLU (1997)
Federal laws prohibiting the display of “patently offensive” and “indecent” online speech violates the First Amendment.
Is the law narrowly tailored enough?
Beauharnais v. Illinois (1952)
Illegal to publish or exhibit any writing or picture portraying the “depravity, criminality, unchastity, or lack of virtue of a class of citizens of any race, color, creed or religion”
Garrison v. Louisiana (1964)
?
Ashton v. Kentucky (1966)
?
Philadelphia Newspapers v. Hepps (1986)
Claims of defamation must be proven false.
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
Established the actual malice standard for defamation of public figures.
Gertz v. Welch (1974)
?
Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986)
?
Morse v. Frederick (2007)
Established faculty’s right to suppress certain forms of speech at school functions if it impugns on their mission statement.
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
Established “School Speech” rulings.
Students do not shed their 1st amendment rights at the gates of public schools.
Kincaid v. Gibson (6th Cir. 2001)
Hazelwood case should not be used as a precedence for college media.
Barnes v. Glen Theater (1991)
Allowed the government to outlaw certain forms of expressive conduct.
Tory v. Cochran (2005)
?
Baker v. Glover (N.D. Ga. 1991)
Bumper sticker, fuck you.
Texas v. Johnson
Flag burning is legal as long as it doesn’t cause harm.
Is Conduct Expressive?
Is there an intent to express a message?
Is there a likelihood the message will be understood by a witness?
Is the expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment?
Is the government regulation aimed directly at the suppression of free expression?
The Strict Scrutiny Test
Is there compelling government interest?
Is the regulation necessary and narrowly tailored?
The O’Brien Test
Is the government regulation within the constitutional power of the government?
Does the regulation further an important or substantial government interest?
Is the interest unrelated to the suppression of free expression?
Is the incidental restriction of free expression no greater than is essential to the furtherance of the stated governmental interest?
