Con Law I: Tests Flashcards
Memorize the various tests
Strict Scrutiny
Compelling state interest with no least restrictive means
Vagueness
A reasonable person cannot tell what is prohibited or permitted or that encourages discriminatory or arbitrary enforcement
Overbreadth
Regulates more speech than allowed for; it may be constitutional to regulate the speech of some but not others. Strong medicine that must be a SUBSTANTIAL breach on constitutional rights.
Prior Restraints (Generally)
Restraints on speech aimed to prevent the speech from occurring rather than to regulate it afterward will result in “direct, immediate, and irreparable damage to our nation or its people.
Licensing as a Prior Restraint
Where a licensing requirement gives arbitrary or unfettered discretion to government officials, the requirement is unconstitutional, and parties may act against the requirement.
Requires an objective/particularized standard for approval, and access to judicial review of decisions.
False Statements in the Press (Public Officials)
False statements made in the press about politicians cannot be prohibited unless the statements were intentionally made with malice or reckless disregard for the truth
Incitement of Illegal Activity
Brandenberg v. Ohio: Speech is protected unless the advocacy is directed with the intent to incite or produce lawless action and is likely to produce such action. 1) Intent to incite; 2) harm is likely to arise; 3) the harm is imminent
True Threat
1) reckless; 2) inteded to cause disturbance of the peace
Fighting Words
Words by which their very utterance inflicts emotional injury or tends to incite an immediate [violent] breach of the peace [against the speaker]. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire
Hostile Audience
State police power to prevent the breach of peace may allow lawful speakers to be removed when their words lead to hostile crowd incitement
Obscenity
Miller Test:
(1) Whether “the average person, applying contemporary community standards,” would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
(2) Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; (3) Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value
Intermediate Scrutiny
Significant government interest, narrowly tailored to support the interest, and leaves suitable alternatives for expression
Government v. Private Speech
Reasonable person standard
Contrary Speech
Cannot force parties to align with/include speech or parties with differing viewpoints, even if on protected grounds
Child Pornography
Ferber Test: Compelling state interest exists to prevent such conduct; conduct to be prohibited must be adequately defined by the applicable state law, as written or authoritatively construed