Civil Liberties: First Amendment Freedoms Chapter 19

The Unalienable Rights Rights & Liberties in American Political thought Civil Rights make Constitutional promises equal for everyone Civil Liberties are protections against the government Each person’s individual rights are relative to the rights of every other person

When rights conflict the courts must weigh the claims carefully Persons to whom the rights are guaranteed Most rights are guaranteed to aliens too Some rights are for citizens of the U.S. only Example: the right to move freely around the country Federalism and Individual Rights The Bill of Rights applies only to the National government, not the State governments The Supreme Court has ruled that State governments may not deny people their rights because of the wording of the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause The 9th Amendment states that there are rights retained by the people that are not spelled out in the Constitution.

Freedom of Religion Religion and the Bill of Rights Establishment Clause – 1st and 14th Amendments prohibit the establishment of a state religion Free Exercise Clause – 1st and 14th Amendments prohibit any interference with the free exercise of religion Separation of Church & State The Establishment Clause separates Church and State Zorach v Clauson, 1952 – RELEASED TIME. The Court has allowed schools to release children from school to attend religious classes if the classes are held on private property.

Engle v Vitale, 1962 – PRAYERS & THE BIBLE Engle v Vitale, 1962 – PRAYERS & THE BIBLE. The Court has ruled against any laws requiring or suggesting prayers or the religious use of the Bible in public schools Westside Community Schools v Mergens, 1990 – STUDENT RELIGIOUS GROUPS. The Court has ruled that schools must allow student religious groups to meet in the school on the same terms that it sets for other student organizations

Epperson v Arkansas, 1908 – EVOLUTION Epperson v Arkansas, 1908 – EVOLUTION. The Court has struck down State laws prohibiting the teaching of evolution or mandating the teaching of the Biblical account of creation Lynch v Donnelly, 1984 – SEASONAL DISPLAYS. The Court has held that public displays of religious beliefs are permissible only if they are part of an otherwise nonreligious or multi-religious display.

Marsh v Chambers, 1983 – CHAPLAINS IN CONGRESS AND STATE LEGISLATURES Marsh v Chambers, 1983 – CHAPLAINS IN CONGRESS AND STATE LEGISLATURES. The Court allows daily prayer in Congress and the State legislatures because such prayer is based on tradition and because adults, unlike schoolchildren, are not “susceptible to religious indoctrination or peer pressure.” Bob Jones University v U.S., 1983 – TAX EXEMPTIONS. The Court allows tax exemptions for religious organizations, but denies tax-exempt status to religious organizations that practice racial discrimination

Mitchell v Helms, 2000 – STATE AID TO PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS Mitchell v Helms, 2000 – STATE AID TO PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS. State aid to parochial schools exists in many forms, but is controversial. Lemon v Kurtzman, 1971 – THE LEMON TEST. The purpose of state aid to religious schools must be secular, not religious, that its primary effect must not be to aid or inhibit religion; and that it must avoid an “excessive entanglement of government with religion.”

Free Exercise of Religion Every person is guaranteed the right to believe whatever that person chooses to believe in matters of religion The Court limits the free exercise of religion in cases where such exercise violates social duties or is subversive of good order. The Court also protects free exercise in the face of strong opposition against it

Freedom of Speech & Press The Bill of Rights/1st Amendment protects free speech and free press, but the Court has ruled that reasonable limits may be placed on this freedom to protect against libel and slander. Libel is writing lies about someone Slander is saying lies about someone Miller v California, 1973 – OBSCENTIY. This is NOT protected by the 1st or 14th Amendments. In 1973, The Court ruled that “contemporary community standards” be sued in judging what is obscene.

Near v Minnesota, 1931 – PRIOR RESTRAINT Near v Minnesota, 1931 – PRIOR RESTRAINT. This is prohibited except in the case of threats to our nation’s security, order of military camps or prisons, and public school officials editorial control over student publications. Brazenburg v Hayes, 1972 – CONFIDENTIALITY. The Court has ruled that it is up to Congress and the States to decide whether the press should be made to reveal their sources Thirty states have given some protection to reporters. These are called shield laws.

Mutual Film Co. v Ohio, 1971 – MOTION PICTURES Mutual Film Co. v Ohio, 1971 – MOTION PICTURES. The get freedom of the press, but are subject to obscenity ruling Red Lion Broadcasting v FCC, 1969 – RADIO AND TV. These are subject to extensive federal regulation because they use public airwaves to broadcast their materials. Many states regulate their shows today.

Tinker v Des Moines, 1969 – SYMBOLIC SPEECH Tinker v Des Moines, 1969 – SYMBOLIC SPEECH. The Court has ruled both ways in deciding cases of freedom of expression by conduct. Their decisions have depended on the circumstances surrounding the incident 44 Liquormart Inc., v Rhode Island, 1996 – COMMERCIAL SPEECH. Advertising is now protected by the 1st and 14th amendments; however, false advertisement is forbidden.

Freedom of Expression & National Security Punishable Acts Espionage – spying against the U.S. Sabotage – plotting to do damage against U.S. property Sedition – involves only speech or writing Treason – waging war against the U.S. or giving aid and/or comfort to the nation’s enemies

The Alien & Sedition Acts In 1798, they gave the U.S. President the power to deport aliens who where against the government Later, they were repealed Seditious Acts in Wartime Schenck v U.S., 1917 – CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER. The Court upheld the conviction of a man who had urged young men to resist the draft Clear & Present Danger – words can be outlawed if they will trigger criminal acts Sedition in Peacetime. The Court has ruled it’s okay to urge someone to believe something, just not to do something