4

.docx

School

Art Institute of Atlanta *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

278

Subject

Political Science

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by SargentEagleMaster979

Cornell Notes Topic/Objective: Name: Class/Period: Date: Essential Question: Questions: Notes: I. Introduction  A democracy depends on the free expression of ideas and thoughts that are muffled or forbidden are enemies of the democratic process.  Americans pride themselves on their free and open society and freedom of conscience is absolute.  The First Amendment forbids the national government from limiting freedom of expression.  Freedom of expression is not absolute, as seen in the example of "shouting 'fire' in a theater." II. Questions for the Courts  First, can the government censor speech that it thinks will violate the law?  Second, what constitutes speech (or press) within the meaning of the First Amendment and deserves constitutional protection? III. Forms of Speech  Political rally to attack an opposing candidate’s stand receives First Amendment protection.  Obscenity, libel, incitement to violence and overthrow of the government does not receive protection.  Certain forms of nonverbal speech, such as picketing, are considered symbolic speech and receive protection.  Judges must balance freedom of expression against competing values such as public order, national security, and the right to a fair trial.  Commercial speech may not receive the same protection as religious and political speech.  Regulating the publicly owned airwaves raises questions on protection. IV. Controversial Issues  Hate speech raises questions on whether it deserves protection.  In 1992, Supreme Court ruled that legislatures and universities may not single out racial, religious, or sexual insults or threats for prosecution as "hate speech" or "bias crimes."  The First Amendment ensures there will not be prior restraint (government actions that prevent material from being published).

 A landmark case involving prior restraint is Near v. Minnesota (1931). V. Extent of Freedom from Prior Restraint  Expressions of students in public schools may be limited more than those of adults in other settings.  Supreme Court has upheld restrictions on the right to publish in the name of national security. VI. Conclusion  The extent of freedom from prior restraint depends on the individual or group. The Supreme Court has ruled that statements about public figures are libelous only if made with malice and reckless disregard for the truth, as stated in New York Times v. Sullivan (1964). Public figures have to prove that whoever wrote or said untrue statements about them knew that the statements were untrue and intended to harm them. On the other hand, private individuals have a lower standard to meet and need only show that the statements made about them were false and the author was negligent. Balancing freedom of expression and individual reputation is an important aspect of libel cases. In the case of General William Westmoreland vs CBS, Westmoreland sued CBS for libel over a documentary called The Uncounted Enemy that claimed that American military leaders in Vietnam, including Westmoreland, lied to Washington about their success there to make it appear that the United States was winning the war. The case was eventually settled for a mild apology. In 1988, the Supreme Court also ruled in the case of Reverend Jerry Falwell vs Hustler magazine, where the limits of parody and libel were explored, and the court ruled in favor of the magazine. Symbolic speech, including burning a flag, wearing an armband, and marching in a parade, are protected under the First Amendment as freedom of expression. The Supreme Court has interpreted freedom of speech to include symbolic speech, and the right to freedom of speech went beyond the spoken word, as stated in the case of Mary Beth Tinker and her brother John who wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. However, the doctrine of symbolic speech is not precise, and there are limitations to what constitutes protected speech. For example, burning a draft card is not protected speech, and states may make it a crime to burn a cross with a purpose to intimidate, as long as the law gives prosecutors the burden of proving that the act was intended as a threat. The Bill of Rights is an inexhaustible source of potential conflicts among different types of freedoms.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version