Transcript APAG Ch. 4 Civil Liberties Assignment #2

Ch. 4 Civil Liberties
Review
Civil Liberties


Limits the power of the federal
government
What the government can NOT do
First Amendment

“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 peaceable to
assemble, and to petition the
government for a redress of
grievances”.
14th Amendment


Originally applied only to laws enacted
by Congress
Gitlow v. New York (1925) – extended
certain provisions of the first
amendment to the governments of the
individual states (due process)
Freedom of Religion


Free exercise clause
Establishment clause
Lemon v. Kurtzman
(1971)

Pennsylvania’s 1968 Nonpublic
Elementary and Secondary Act –
allowed the state Superintendent of
Public Instruction to reimburse
nonpublic schools (most – Catholic) for
the salaries of teachers who taught
secular material, secular textbooks,
and secular materials
Lemon Test




If any of the 3 requirements are
violated, the government’s actions are
deemed unconstitutional
1. The government's action must have a secular legislative
purpose;
2. The government's action must not have the primary effect
of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
3. The government's action must not result in an "excessive
government entanglement" with religion.
Freedom of Expression

Speech and national security
What did Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes say about restricting free
speech in Schenck v. United States
(1919)?

Restrictions on free speech are
permissible only when speech presents
a “clear and present danger” to the
public.
What is the bad-tendency rule?
Where did it come from?


It is a rule stating that speech or other
First Amendment freedoms may be
curtailed if there is a possibility that
such expression might lead to some
“evil.”
It came from the decision in Gitlow v.
New York.
Describe what happened in the Gitlow
case.

A member of a left-wing group was
convicted of violating New York State’s
criminal anarchy statute when he
published and distributed a pamphlet
urging the violent overthrow of the
U.S. government.
What is prior restraint?

Restraining an action before the
activity has actually occurred. It
involves censorship, as opposed to
subsequent punishment.
Describe the significance of
New York Times v. United States
(1971)
The New York Times case involve the
Pentagon Papers, a document critical
of the U.S. involvement in the Vietnam
War. The government argued against
its publication on the grounds of
national security. The Court upheld
the “prior restraint” rule and allowed
the publication.
What is symbolic speech? Give
examples.

Symbolic speech is nonverbal
expression of beliefs, which is given
substantial protection by the courts.
Examples include gestures,
movements, articles of clothing,
burning of the flag, etc.
What did the Supreme Court say in
these cases concerning symbolic
speech?
A) Tinker v. Des Moines School
District (1969)
B) Texas v. Johnson (1989)
A)
B)
The Court ruled that students could
wear black arm bands to protest the
Vietnam War.
The Court ruled that burning of the
American flag is a form of symbolic
speech and is protected.



Fighting words – racial slurs that can
provoke the “average” listener to fight
Hecklers’ veto – disruptive behavior by
listeners to public speakers
Gag orders – judge order to avoid the
publishing of case information
Obscenity
How did Justice Potter Stewart define
obscenity in Jacobellis v. Ohio?

“I know it when I see it”

What are the requirements established
by Miller v. California for a material to
be considered legally obscene?
1) The average person must find it violates
contemporary community standards.
2) The work taken as a whole appeals to a
prurient interest in sex.
3) The work shows patently offensive sexual
conduct.
4) The work lacks serious redeeming literary,
artistic, political, or scientific merit.
According to the Court in the Miller case,
who defines “prurient interests”?
What problem does this cause?


The definition is left to community
standards.
The problem is that a work of art in
New York or California would put you
in jail in Florida.
How tough has the Supreme Court
been on child pornography?

It has been very tough. It has upheld
state laws making it illegal.
How has the Court ruled about
pornography on the internet? Has
these decisions been good or bad for
us?


The Court has ruled almost all
restrictions of the internet as
unconstitutional.
This has protected our access to
information that may have been
blocked by the government.
What is defamation of character?
What is the difference between
slander and libel?



Defamation of character is wrongfully
hurting a person’s good reputation.
Slander is the public uttering of a false
statement that harms the good
reputation of another.
Written defamation is libel.
When it comes to libel, what is the
difference between private individuals
and public figures (public officials,
movie stars, and generally all persons
who become know to the public
because of their positions or
activities)?

For public figures, in order to sue for
libel, they must prove:
*The statement was made with
actual malice — that is, with either
knowledge of its falsity or a reckless
disregard of the truth.
Why are radio and television
broadcasts more limited in their rights
to freedom of speech?

Because the government owns the
airwave frequencies and regulates
them with the FCC (Federal
Communications Commission). That’s
why cable stations like HBO can have
more provocative shows.
What is the Equal Time Rule? The
Personal Attack Rule?


The Equal Time Rule is a FCC regulation
that requires broadcasting stations that give
or sell air time to political candidates to
make equal amounts of time available to all
competing candidates.
The Personal Attack Rule is a FCC regulation
that requires broadcasting stations, if the
stations are used to attack the honesty or
integrity of persons, to allow the persons
attacked the fullest opportunity to respond.
Privacy




Roe v. Wade (1973)
1st-woman and her doctor decide
2nd-specific conditions
3rd-states allowed to outlaw/regulate