1st Amendment Research Paper

The voting age should be increased to 19 or 21 years of age. Most 18 year olds have just graduated or are still in highschool, so many of them are immature,and lack life experience. In addition, many 18 year olds do not have a plan(s) after high school, so if they can’t make a decision about their future what makes people think that they can make an informed decision about the future of the country. However, there are some states like Ohio that are allowing seventeen year olds to vote in primaries.

“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.” (Jacobus 93). Just like the Freedom of Religion there are limitations placed on the Freedom of Speech so that other people’s rights aren’t compromised. For example, people are not allowed to present true threats, or “fighting words” to another person. This restriction was put into play in the court case of Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire. The Court ruled that “fighting words, by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace and may be punished consistent with the First Amendment.” (Ruane 3-4). In this case if someone was to use “fighting words” which is their perceived freedom of speech, it would not only violate the law, it could violate someone’s freedom of pursue life, liberty, and happiness. With this, we can see that freedom is not always as it

Throughout history, the United States Constitution has been put to the test over the issue of free speech. The First Amendment states, "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." Even though free speech is one of the core American values proudly embedded in each citizen, some poopAmericans find themselves torn between whether or not to limit the freedom of speech on behalf of hate speech. Most law-abiding citizens disagree with hate speech, but must realize even speech that promotes hate, racism, and even crime

The first amendment, the right of freedom of speech is one of the most important classic fantasy to almost anyone living in the United States, building the foundation of our nation. This right gives us plenty of different opportunities to express our opinions and political viewpoints on any issues in America. But it comes with a price, people have been protesting multiple different events trying to prevent people from expressing opposing opinions or political viewpoints on that has issues in America. For the minority of people, expressing a different opinion should be protected no matter how controversial or insensitive it may be.

From the beginning, the United States Constitution has guaranteed the American people civil liberties. These liberties have given citizens rights to speak, believe, and act freely. The Constitution grants citizens the courage to express their mind about something they believe is immoral or unjust. The question is, how far are citizens willing to extend the meanings of these liberties? Some people believe that American citizens take advantage of their civil liberties, harming those around them. On the contrary, many other people feel that civil liberties are necessary tools to fight for their Constitutional rights.

The last three article of the Constitution tied up loose ends that may have been left out. The Fifth Amendment laid out the amendment process, which the founders knew would be inevitable. The Sixth Amendment ensured that the new government would pay the debts owed by the old, established Federal law as supreme, and gave the oath of office for all politicians. The Seventh Amendment gave the guidelines for ratification of the Constitution. After all of the previous articles the last three were the loose ends that tied everything up into a nice neat package to be sent to the states.

The American constitution recognizes the right to keep arms for defense of person and property as a privilege or immunity that cannot be abridged by the states. The Glucksberg test recognizes the right to keep arms for defense of person and property as a privilege or immunity that cannot be abridged by the states. The 2nd Amendment is unnecessary for applying this right to the states through the Privileges or Immunities Clause. 1: The Right to keep and Bear Arms in Defense of Person and Property Is Deeply Rooted in our Nation’s History and Tradition. Glucksberg Step 2: Describing the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Defense of Person and Property. Knowing we have the right to own guns is important to those who stand with the 2nd Amendment. If owing a gun makes you feel

Over time the Supreme Court has decided that certain aspects of freedom of speech are more important than others. For example, if someone used their First Amendment rights to lie about things they knew were false, threatened to commit a crime, insult another person, or used overly explicit content, the courts have moral grounds to prosecute those persons. It makes sense that if someone’s freedom of speech lessened another person’s right to freedom of religion or freedom of opinion by instilling fear, that is an unfair use of the First Amendment. These parameters, although not specifically outlined in the Bill of Rights are very important to protect everyone’s right to feel safe believing the things that they do.

Most people would link violence and crime problems with gun control in America. The debate that Americans face today is the freedom the Second Amendment gives citizens and whether or not the country should repeal it. While some people feel that repealing it should solve the problem, others believe that it is one of the most important basic freedoms we have as Americans. Federal gun control laws are unconstitutional, and I believe the Second Amendment is both an individual and state right.

The First Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is our rights as citizens living in the United States of America. In this paper I will look at three provisions to the First Amendment, highlighting one case for each provision. Included are one case to discuss freedom of speech, one case to discuss separation of church and state and one case to discuss freedom of association.

The United States of America seems to be protected by a very important historical document called the Constitution. Despite the fact that it was written and signed many years ago, the American people and their leaders still have faith in the Constitution. One of the major statements of the Constitution is the First Amendment, freedom of speech. Although it is difficult to decide what is offensive and what is not, it is clear to see that songs of rape, violence, bigotry, and songs containing four letter words are completely unnecessary for susceptible minds to acknowledge. It is reasonable to say that more people listen to music everyday and for that reason, music tends to be more influential. The American

The fourth amendment protects citizen’s right against unreasonable search and seizures. Law enforcement are required to show probable cause to be issued a warrant which grants law enforcement to conduct a legal search. There are a few exceptions when a warrant is not required, but probable cause is still needed.

EW YORK (WENY) - In a effort top stop terrorist attacks, two lawmakers from the New York City area are looking to restrict the sale of ammunition for New York gun owners. Under the draft legislation it would limit ammunition to no more than twice the amount of the capacity of the weapon every 90-days.

As hate crimes have risen in number during the past five years; many state governments have attempted to prevent such crimes by passing laws called bias laws. These laws make a crime that is motivated by hatred based on the victim’s race, religion, ethnic background, or sexual orientation a more serious crime than such an act would ordinarily be. Many people believe that these laws violate the criminal’s freedom of speech. Many hate group members say that freedom of speech is the right to say or write or publish one’s thoughts, or to express one’s self, they also say that this right is guaranteed to all Americans. But people and organizations who are against these hate groups ask themselves if the first amendment include and protect all form of expression, even those that ugly or hurtful like the burning crosses. The Supreme Court Justices have decided that some kinds of speech are not protected by the Constitution,

As stated by Martin Luther King Jr., in this world, “there are two types of laws: just and unjust,” and I’m sure most everyone can see both types in our government. Many laws put in by the american government are seen as one that is an inalienable right while others are seen as unfair and need to be rejected immediately. However, in the 21st century, even if citizens believe such cruel laws should be changed, their first idea is normally to post something on the internet and rant about it. That right there is them practicing their 1st amendment right to the freedom of speech. In other words, it is the right of the people to be able to protest the unjust laws of the government, putting them in check of the power they have over the people. Even if they have this right to go against the government 's wishes, there have been many cases in history, such as protests in LA and Ferguson, Missouri, where protests turn to violent riots which result in unnecessary death and destruction. How can we stop these riots and violent acts without taking away the citizens right to the first amendment? Where do we draw the line to what citizens protest about? Well, we cannot write a law that prevents one from protesting his or her opinion. However, even though the majority of people may disagree with someone 's protest, they still have the right to the first amendment: Only if the protest they execute is civil and done in a peaceful manner. If citizens decide they need to protest in order to