3.3a First Amendment: Freedom of Speech

Announcements:

In addition to reading today's post, please make sure you:

1. Read the Street Law summary of Schenck v. US, one of the required SCOTUS cases
2. Fill out the SCOTUS Required Cases Matrix for Schenck v. US (Use the same copy that you have been using)
3. Watch the EdPuzzle video on Freedom of Speech and answer the questions.
4. Outline of everything is on our weekly planner.

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

Today's Question: How does the government effectively interpret and balance individual liberties guaranteed in the First Amendment with the need to maintain social order?

Learning Standards:

LOR-2.C: Explain the extent to which the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First and Second Amendments reflects a commitment to individual liberty.

LOR-2.C.2: The Supreme Court has held that symbolic speech is protected by the First Amendment, demonstrated by Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), in which the court ruled that public school students could wear black armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War.

LOR-2.C.3: Efforts to balance social order and individual freedom are reflected in interpretations of the First Amendment that limit speech, including:

• Time, place, and manner regulations 
• Defamatory, offensive, and obscene statements and gestures 
• That which creates a “clear and present danger” based on the ruling in Schenck v. United States (1919)

LOR-3.B.1: The Supreme Court has on occasion ruled in favor of states’ power to restrict individual liberty; for example, when speech can be shown to increase the danger to public safety.

Freedom of Speech

In addition to protecting religious freedoms, the First Amendment also guarantees freedom of speech. Again, this is not absolute as the government may place limits on certain types of speech. Today we will look at the Court's history of interpreting freedom of speech in the US.

The first major case dealing with freedom of speech is Schenck v. US. This is a College Board required SCOTUS case. Make sure you fill out your matrix on this case.

• Schenck was convicted of the Espionage Act for passing out fliers advocating citizens to refuse participation in the military draft during World War I.
• He argued that the 1st Amendment's Freedom of Speech guarantee protected him from being punished.
• The Court upheld his conviction, declaring that speech that poses "a clear and present danger" may be limited
• Famous quote--it doesn't protect a man falsely yelling fire in a crowded theater

The Court has dealt with a number of other free speech cases.

In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the Court ruled that "fighting words" were not protected under the 1st Amendment.

Is inflammatory speech, speech that potentially threatens others, protected? The Court's 1969 decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio created a broad interpretation of the freedom of speech and protected the KKK's speech since it did not create an imminent unlawful action.

Symbolic Speech
Speech does not have to be verbal to convey a message. Several court cases have dealt with symbolic speech.

U.S. v. O'Brien (1968)--can the government punish you for burning your draft card?

Texas v. Johnson (1989)--is burning an American flag a protected form of symbolic speech under the 1st Amendment?

Virginia v. Black (2003)--is Virginia's law prohibiting the burning of crosses with the intent to intimidate someone a violation of the 1st Amendment?
Review Videos: