First Amendment - Content Neutral

Question 1

A music stage in Central Park. Nearby apartments complainted to the city about excessive noise from concerts, so to regulate the volume NYC required performers to use sound equipment provided by the city.

Answer 1

The justification for this law is to keep peace and quiet, not to prevent the content of speech (stop racism).

There were also open alternative channels of communication because it does not ban a particular manner of speech at a given time or place.

3 part test:
1. Content-neutral
2. Narrowly tailored
3. Ample room for alternate communication

Question 2

City of Renton v. Playtime Theaters)
The city created a zoning ordinance that prohibits adult movie theaters from locating within 1,000 feet of any residential area, church, or park and within one mile of any school.

Answer 2

Content-neutral time, place, and manner regulations are acceptable, so long as they are designed to serve a substantial government interest AND do not unreasonably limit alternative forms of communication.

All theaters are not banned
not aimed at preventing content, but is aimed at preventing the secondary effects of these theaters. With the distance restrictions, there is still plenty of land available to build the adult theater, and there is further a substantial interest in preserving the quality of urban life.

Question 3

US v. O’Brien
O’Brien and three others burned their draft cards at the courthouse in front of a crowd.

Whether an important government interest can justify incidental limits on speech when conduct has speech and non-speech components.

Answer 3

1. They are within the government’s constitutional power
2. The government interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression
3. It furthers an important/substantial government interest; AND
4. If the incidental restriction on alleged First Amend. freedom is no greater than essential for the furtherance of that interest.

Congress has the constitutional ability to classify individuals for military service and establish a registration system. Legislation designed to ensure the availability of registration certificates issued in aid of the system (e.g., the UMTSA) serves a legitimate and substantial purpose in the system’s administration. Destroying or mutilating the registration certificates would defeat the certificates’ purpose by (1) making it difficult to verify registration;

Question 4

(Texas v. Johnson)
johnson publicly burned an American flag as a means of political protest. He was the only protestor arrested.
Texas is concerned that flag burning would lead people to believe either that the flag does not stand for nationhood and national unity, or that concepts reflected in the flag do not actually exist (i.e., that the nation is not unified).

Answer 4

johnson’s conduct is expressive conduct, which is appropriate given that Johnson burned the flag during a political demonstration, and his conduct had an intentionally clear and obvious express political message.

Texas is concerned that flag burning would lead people to believe either that the flag does not stand for nationhood and national unity, or that concepts reflected in the flag do not actually exist (i.e., that the nation is not unified). As these concerns relate to the suppression of expression contained in flag burning, O’Brien’s test does not apply and strict scrutiny applies.