Free Expression

1
Free Expression
2
The 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 peaceably to assemble,
  
• and to petition the government for a redress of
  grievances.

3
Why?
4
Is it "Speech"? Is it Protected?
5
Vote for Me!
6
FIRE!!!
7
Were ashamed George Bush is from Texas!!!
8
If a law tries to directly ban content of speech,
Courts examine the law under Strict Scrutiny test

• Compelling government interest AND
• Least restrictive law possible to meet that
  interest.

9
I want you to take out Sonny the Snitch
10
(No Transcript)
11
YOUR MOMMA IS SO UGLY, I COULD BARELY TAKE HER ON
A DATE!
AT LEAST I DONT HAVE A NASTY MULLET!!!
HOW DARE YOU MOCK MY MULLET!?!?!? THEMS
FIGHTIN WORDS!!
12
Fighting Words

• Likely to provoke the average person to
  retaliation, andcause a breach of the peace.
• Words that have a direct tendency to cause acts
  of violence by the listener, when spoken
  directly to him.
• No modern case has declared any speech to be
  Fighting Words.

13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
What Can Be Punished?

• Teaching of forceful overthrow of government, AND
• Instructions or directions on how to revolt

16
(No Transcript)
17
Hate Speech

• NOT OK for govt to ban outright
• But the expression cannot be a direct threat
• It IS OK for government to say hateful motive
  more jail time

18

• Mr. Johnson likes to kill bunnies and
  kittens! And then eat them!

19
Defamation

• Public Official
• Actual malice
• Public Figure
• What makes them public?
• Private Person
• See you in court!

Truth is always a defense!!!
20
(No Transcript)
21
Time, Place, and Manner Restrictions

• Content neutral
• CANNOT be used to suppress a particular idea, and
  must be applied to ALL speakers
• Narrowly tailored to achieve significant
  government interest
• Interest CANOT be to suppress
• an idea
• Other avenues of expressing the
• viewpoint must be available

22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
Burning Draft Cards
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
What is Obscene?

• Appeals to prurient interest (causes lust)
• Patently offensive description of defined
  sexual conduct
• No serious literary, artistic, political, or
  scientific value

28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
Commercial Speech

• Communication which proposes a commercial
  transaction (sometimes a hard question!)
• Protected, but subject to more regulation

31
The Case of the Student Protesters (1) Students
are protesting the fact that their high school
serves meat in the cafeteria, because they
believe killing animals for food is murder. They
never skip class to protest, but they often
protest in the middle of the day during free
periods. They are friendly, but they can
sometimes get loud enough to hear in class.
Teachers have complained that the sight of the
protests outside of their classroom windows is
distracting. The principal, who has often said
that animal rights protesters arent worth
listening to, finally decided enough was enough,
and banned all protesting on school grounds. The
students sued the school to be allowed to
continue speaking out for the animals. You are
the judges in this case. Who should win?
32
The Case of the Black Armbands (2) A group of
students, in order to protest the war in Iraq,
decided to wear black armbands at school. They
arent being disruptive, noisy, or saying
anything about their opinions during class time.
Between classes, however, they sometimes get into
heated arguments with other students, many of
whom are from military families. These
discussions are emotional, but never have crossed
the line into fighting. The principal, who has a
son fighting in Iraq, decided that he didnt want
to risk future disruption, and banned the
armbands from the school. He then suggested (but
did not require) that everyone wear American flag
armbands, saying, We can disagree about the war,
but we should all support the troops and our
country. The students sued the school to be
allowed to continue wearing their armbands,
saying their First Amendment rights had been
violated. You are the judges in this case. Who
should win?
33
The Case of the Burning Cross (3) Jeffrey and
his family, who are black, recently moved to
Minneapolis, Minnesota in a (previously) all
white neighborhood. One night around midnight,
Jeffrey heard some noise outside. He got up just
in time to see his neighbor Bill lighting a large
wooden cross on fire directly in front of his
house. Jeffrey called the police, who arrested
Bill. Minnesota had a law which said Anyone
who burns a cross in a public place with the
intent to threaten another based on his or her
race, religion, or nationality, shall be guilty
of a felony. Bill was convicted and sentenced
to 6 months in jail, but he appealed the
decision, claiming his First Amendment rights had
been violated. He insists that he never intended
to threaten anyone, and that he was simply making
a statement of white pride. Other neighbors
said at trial that Bill had burned crosses in the
street even before Jeffreys family moved
in. You are the judges in this case. Who should
win?
34
The Case of the St. Patricks Day Parade
(4) Every year on St. Patricks day, Erin
OMalley, a private business woman, organizes and
puts on a large parade through down town. The
city issues a parade permit, but otherwise has
nothing to do with the planning of the event or
the selection of participants. Usually, Erin
chooses the floats and other participants for the
parade on a first-come, first-serve basis.
Shes been doing it this way for more than 10
years with no problems. Some of the groups who
march express political opinions, ask people to
vote for certain candidates, etc. Erin doesnt
always agree with them, but has never turned down
a request to participate. This year, though, a
group of abortion rights activists called KAL
(Keep Abortion Legal) have applied to march in
the parade. Erin is a devoted Catholic, and
thinks abortion is morally wrong. She told KAL
that she couldnt in good conscience be
associated with their group. KAL sued the city,
saying that because the parade was on public
streets, and the city issued a permit, closed the
streets for the event, and provided extra police
for security, Erin was not acting as a private
person. KAL argued that they therefore had a
right to march in the parade, and that they could
not be discriminated against for their
viewpoint. You are the judges in this case. Who
should win?
35
The Case of the School Newspaper (5) Adam and
Carla write for the high school newspaper. The
principle usually looks it over before the paper
goes to the publishers, but has never before said
anything about the content of the articles. In
the last issue, however, the principal pulled two
articles one each from Adam and Carla. One
article was about divorce, and described (without
naming any names) several students and their
experiences with their parents divorce. The
other article was an opinion piece strongly
against gay marriage. The principal felt that
the divorce article put other students privacy
in danger. He also believed that the article on
gay marriage was simply inappropriate for a high
school newspaper, and besides, he thought Carlas
opinion on the subject was ignorant, offensive,
and wrong. The students sued the school, saying
their free speech rights had been violated. The
principal says he has a strong interest in
maintaining good order and discipline in the
school, and that includes protecting privacy and
not allowing age-inappropriate discussions. You
are the judges in this case. Who should win?