1. OGT Benchmark: Explain how individual rights are relative, not absolute, and describe the balance between individual rights, the rights of others, and the common good. The Rights of U.S. Citizens Times When Individual Rights Have Been Restricted

2. I. The Rights of U.S. Citizens Bill of Rights 1st amendmentfreedom of religion, speech, and the press 2nd amendmentright of peaceful assembly and petition 4th amendmentprotection against unreasonable search and seizure 5th amendmentdouble jeopardy, right to refuse to testify against oneself, protection against being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law

3. I. The Rights of U.S. Citizens Bill of Rights 6th amendmentright to speedy, public trial by an impartial jury. Right to confront witnesses, right to subpoena witnesses, right to have an attorney 7th amendmentRight to a jury trial in a civil suit 8th amendmentProtection against excessive bail or fines, protection against cruel and unusual punishment

4. A. Restrictions on Rights on U.S. Citizens 1.rights are NOT ABSOLUTE 2.examples a. religion: can’t have human/animal sacrifice b. speech: can’t threaten others 3.Must be balance between individual rights, the rights of others, and the common good 4.criteria used to determine limits on individual rights: a. clear and present danger b. compelling government interest c. libel d. national security e. public safety f. equal opportunity

5. II. Times When Individual Rights Have Been Restricted  There have been many times in U.S. history when individual rights have been restricted

6. A. WWI and the Standard of Clear and Present Danger 1. outlawed interference with the draft 2. punishment: 20 years in prison ad $10,000 fine 3. overall, 2000 convicted

7. Schenck v. United States 1. Charles Schenck, member of the Socialist Party 2. sent 15,000 flyers to people trying to get them to refuse the draft 3. In 1919, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes established “clear and present danger” rule 4. speech is not absolute 5. can be restricted if there is a clear and present danger of its producing harm to others

8. 1.1918, Eugene V. Debs, a Socialist labor leader 2.Speech in Canton, Ohio 3.“Socialism is the answer. I might not be able to say all that I think, but you need to know that you are fit for something better than slavery and cannon fodder.” 4.he was arrested, convicted, and sentenced to 10 years in prison 5.he broke “clear and present danger” rule Debs v. the United States

9. B. Conscientious Objectors 1. you do not have to fight in combat if religion strictly forbids it (church HAD to show a history of being against war) 2. must be approved by the draft board 3. many were forced to be drafted, then court- martialed when they refused 4. those who did get out--they would have to do alternative service 5. treatment of conscientious objectors –a. those who refused alternative service were treated harshly (prison and public humiliation) 6. Rights were taken away from conscientious objectors because of clear and present danger and national security

10. 1. Ex: protecting children from “indecent” content on TV 2. Communications Decency Act: restrictions on the Internet. Supreme Court overturned this! 3. Bakke vs. California (1978) and Grutter vs. Bollinger (2003) The compelling government interest: using race as a factor of accepting students into colleges Bakke case: Race used as an admissions criteria (affirmative action) Grutter: white woman who wanted to get into U. of Michigan Law School challenged this. She won in district court, but Supreme Court upheld Bakke decision that race can be used as an admissions criteria C. Compelling Government Interest

11. 4. Eminent domain: citizens can be forced to sell land to the gov. so that roads can be built on that land *This is compelling gov. interest in providing a public service

12. 1. Restriction of freedom of speech: can’t defame someone’s reputation by speaking lies 2. only living people 3. true statements are never considered libel Ex: newspaper can print a restaurant’s health code violations D. Libel

13. 1st Red Scare (1917 to 1920): Fear of immigrants, of Communism because of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, and of foreigners Ex: Sacco and Venzetti, A. Mitchell Palmer 2nd Red Scare (1948-1956): Fear of Communism, Cold War Ex: Joseph McCarthy E. National Security and the Red Scare

14. 1. OGT Multiple Choice To silence critics during World War I, the government used which of the following criteria for limiting individual rights? A. compelling government interest B. clear and present danger C. libel D. equal opportunity

15. 2. OGT Multiple Choice Which Supreme Court case used the compelling government interest criterion? A. Schneck vs. United States B. Debs v. United States C. Grutter v. Bollinger D. Abrams v. United States

16. 3. OGT Multiple Choice Laws that restrict toxic emissions from factory smokestacks are an example of which of the following criteria for limiting rights? A. national security B. libel C. public safety D. equal opportunity

17. 4. OGT Multiple Choice What tactic did both A. Mitchell Palmer and Joseph McCarthy use to gain support for their actions? A. They sponsored public forms to debate communism B. They encouraged free expression of communistic ideas C. They organized protest rallies to raise pubic awareness D. They manipulated public fear of communism

18. 5. OGT Multiple Choice In a letter to the editor of a local paper, a citizen made knowingly false statements about a neighbor in order to cause the neighbor public embarrassment. This is an example of A. clear and present danger B. libel C. due process D. compelling interest

19. 6. OGT Multiple Choice (OGT Test, 2008) During World War I, conscientious objectors to military service were often accused of disloyalty, and some conscientious objectors were sentenced to prison. However, other conscientious objectors were willing to accept noncombatant service. A. balance individual rights and the common good. B. educate people about their constitutional rights. C. promote ethnic diversity within the military. D. encourage people to apply for conscientious objector status.

20. 7. OGT Multiple Choice (OGT Test, 2007) When the government builds interstate highways, citizens can be forced (under the principle of eminent domain) to sell private land that lies in the path of the highway. The reason for this is that the property rights of individuals are balanced by A. the government’s need to raise tax revenues. B. the need to enforce laws against libel and slander. C. a compelling government interest in providing public services. D. the need to guarantee equal opportunities to all citizens.

21. 8. OGT Multiple Choice (OGT Test, 2007) Freedom of assembly is guaranteed by the First Amendment, but assemblies may legally be broken up when protesters A. publicly oppose U.S. foreign policy. B. attempt to disrupt public safety. C. express opinions that are controversial. D. are members of a religious organization.

22. 9. OGT Multiple Choice (OGT Test, 2006) In the United States, freedom of the press to report on certain matters may be restricted during wartime because A. reporting military secrets may threaten national security. B. laws against libel and slander are strictly enforced during wartime. C. materials used to print newspapers must be conserved during wartime. D. the government has a compelling interest in suppressing opposing views.

23. 10. OGT Multiple Choice (OGT Test, 2005) In the United States, a citizen’s exercise of speech and expression may be legally restricted when that individual A. condemns public institutions. B. opposes public opinion. C. criticizes public officials. D. threatens public safety.

24. 11. OGT Multiple Choice When would the right of freedom of religion be restricted? A. A religious group goes door-to-door to talk about its beliefs. B. A televangelist asks people to send his church money. C. A religious cult uses animal sacrifices as part of its rituals. D. A group of people say they are atheist— they do not believe in God.

25. 12. OGT Multiple Choice (2005 Practice Test) Charles Schenck was found guilty of violating the 1917 Espionage Act by distributing leaflets through the mail urging men to resist induction under the military draft for World War I. On appeal, Schenck’s attorneys argued the distribution of the leaflets was protected by the 1st Amendment. The Supreme Court upheld his convictions. This case illustrates how individual rights can be balanced against A. the rights of other individuals B. the security of the nation in a time of war C. The opportunities for people to enlist in the military D. the interest of the gov. in keeping courts open to provide justice

26. OGT Extended Response In 1918, Eugene V. Debs, a leader of the American Socialist Party, gave an antiwar speech in Canton, Ohio. In the speech, Debs supported other Socialist leader who has already been arrested for their opposition to the draft. Debs said, “You have your lives to lose…You need to know that you are fit for something better than slavery and cannon fodder.” Because of this speech, Debs was arrested, tried, and convicted for violating the Sedition Act (1918), which was an amendment to the Espionage Act. The Sedition Act prohibited any speech that interfered with the military draft. Do you think Debs’ speech constituted a clear and present danger to the laws of the United States? Why or why not? Do you agree with the Court’s decision in this case? Why or why not?