3.4 First Amendment: Freedom of the Press, the Right to Petition, and the Right to Assemble

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

1. Read the Street Law Summary on New York Times vs. U.S. (required case).
2. Fill in the information about this case on the Supreme Court case matrix (use the same copy you have been using)
3. Complete the Khan Academy modules on freedom of the press.
4. Study for the 1st Amendment Civil Liberties quiz on Monday.

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

Today's Essential 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.4: In New York Times Co. v. United States (1971), the Supreme Court bolstered the freedom of the press, establishing a “heavy presumption against prior restraint” even in cases involving national security.

Freedom of the Press

The last three freedoms of the 1st Amendment (press, petition, assemble) are essential in a working democracy. A free press is necessary to inform citizens of the actions of government officials. It serves as a watchdog and holds government accountable for its abuses. The right to petition and assemble, along with freedom of speech, allow citizens to organize and speak out against government policy and advocate for change. Like other rights, these are not absolute and the courts have had to settle various disputes about the extent of the freedom of the press and the right to petition and assemble.

Prior Restraint

Can the government prohibit a story before it is even published or broadcast (prior restraint)? There are several court cases that address this issue.

Near v. Minnesota (1931): Could local government officials stop a newspaper from publishing articles that they found to be "malicious, scandalous, and defamatory" ahead of time? Could government officials use prior restraint to stop the publication of articles that they found to be offensive?

The Court ruled that prior restraint was a violation of the 1st Amendment and in this case applied it to the states via the 14th Amendment's due process clause (selective incorporation!)

What if the news story contained classified government information that had been illegally leaked to the newspapers? In New York Times v. United States (1971) the Court was faced with that very question. Watch the video below to find the answer. This is a College Board required case!

How does prior restraint work when it comes to student newspapers? The Supreme Court tackled that question in the 1988 case, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier. Could school administrators stop the publication of an article (one on divorce, another on teen pregnancy) in the school newspaper? Would that violate the Court's previous rulings on prior restraint? Watch this video to find out.

To summarize, generally speaking the Court has ruled against the government practice of prior restraint.

The Right to Petition & the Right to Assemble

What limits can be placed on the right to petition or peaceably assemble? The courts have said that restrictions can be based on:

• Time
• Place
• Manner

For example, protests directly outside a school or courtroom that are disruptive can be prohibited. It is legal for states and local governments to require a special permit (provided it is applied equally for all groups) to demonstrate. Actions that directly incite violence may also be halted if law enforcement feels that they can no longer maintain order.

Perhaps nowhere are the limits of the 1st Amendment tested more than the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) and their practice of protesting at military funerals and other high profile events (including Liberty High School's graduation last year). Using the shield of the 1st Amendment's freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the right to assemble, WBC has successfully deflected legal challenges and continues to spew their hate-filled message. To find out more about the Westboro Baptist Church, headquartered just down the road in Topeka, watch these two videos.

3.3b The First Amendment: Freedom of Speech (students)

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

1. Read the Street Law summary on Tinker v. Des Moines (required case).
2. Fill in the information about this case on the Supreme Court case matrix (use the same copy you have been using)
3. Complete the self-check quiz on Freedom of Speech.
4. Google Meet today at 10:30-11:30am and/or 1:00-2:00pm. Links are on our weekly planner.

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

Today's Essential Question: How does the First Amendment's freedom of speech clause apply to students at school?

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

Yesterday's lesson focused on the protections and limitations of the 1st Amendment's freedom of speech. Similar to the Establishment Clause, the courts often address issues related to conflicts between school officials (the government) and students' rights. Today we will examine what protections, if any, are guaranteed for students.

The main case dealing with student freedom of speech is Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). Students were suspended for wearing black armbands to school to protest the war in Vietnam. Did the school have the authority to suspend students or was this a protected form of speech? Does the 1st Amendment extend its protections to students?

The Court ruled in favor of the students, stating that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the front door of the school. This symbolic, political speech was protected.

Bethel v. Fraser (1986) addressed another student speech issue when Matthew Fraser gave a nominating speech for student council at a school assembly with sexual innuendo. The Court ruled against Fraser in this case.

A more recent case is the infamous Morse v. Frederick (2007), more commonly referred to as the Bong Hits 4 Jesus case. Watch the video below for more information.

Review Videos

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:

3.2b The First Amendment: Free Exercise Clause

Listen to the screencast of today's post here.

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

1. Read the Street Law summary of Wisconsin v. Yoder, one of the required SCOTUS cases
2. Fill out the SCOTUS Required Cases Matrix for Wisconsin v. Yoder. (Use the same copy that you made for Engel v. Vitale and keep filling in as we cover additional cases)
3. Complete assigned Khan Academy readings and self-quiz on the Free Exercise Clause.
4. Outline of everything is on our weekly planner.

Similar to the post on the Establishment Clause, today's lesson has quite a few court cases. The only case that is required by the College Board is Wisconsin v. Yoder, but I have included the others to show you how the courts have handled different issues of protecting people's religious liberties vs. government regulation and restrictions. Please make sure you understand the differences between cases that are Establishment Clause-based (government endorsement or promotion of religion) vs. Free Exercise cases (government restriction on personal religious freedoms).

As always, email me if you have any questions or need help!

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

______________________________________________________

Today's Essential Question: How does the government effectively interpret and balance religious freedom and practice with respect to the First Amendment?

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.1: The interpretation and application of the First Amendment’s establishment and free exercise clauses reflect an ongoing debate over balancing majoritarian religions practice and free exercise, as represented by such cases as:

• Engel v. Vitale (1962), which declared school sponsorship of religious activities violates the establishment clause 
• Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), which held that compelling Amish students to attend school past the eighth grade violates the free exercise clause 

Free Exercise Clause

The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prevents government endorsement of religion, but the Free Exercise Clause guarantees your right to believe in whatever religion (or none at all) without restriction. However, government may restrict action based on those beliefs if it violates the law or infringes on the rights of others. Just like other rights, it is not absolute.Today, we will look at a few issues involving the free exercise of religion.

Reynolds v. US, 1879: One of the first cases involving the free exercise clause involved the Mormon Church and the practice of polygamy. Can someone have multiple spouses if it is part of their religious beliefs?

Wisconsin v. Yoder, 1972: Another famous free exercise case involved whether or not Amish families could be exempt from a state law that required all children to attend school until the age of 16.

Other free exercise of religion questions:

Should people be able to claim religious exemptions for mandatory vaccinations?

Can states ban the practice of snake-handling for religious purposes?

Employment Division v. Smith: Can a state deny unemployment benefits if a person was fired for illegal drug use, even if that drug use (peyote) was part of a religious ceremony?

West Virginia v. Barnette, 1943: Can a state compel people to recite the pledge of allegiance, even if it goes against their religious beliefs?

Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 1993: Are ritualistic animal sacrifices protected under the free exercise clause?

Can a Pastafarian wear a colander on his head for his driver's license photo?

Discuss the following scenario:

George Daniels was fired in 1998 for wearing a small gold cross on his uniform collar. Daniels, an evangelical Christian and 14-year decorated sergeant, had been twice ordered to stop wearing the pin. He began wearing it when he was a plainclothes officer. The Arlington Police Department said the agency's interest in maintaining a public appearance of impartiality outweighed Daniels' right to promote his Christianity.

How should the courts rule in this case?

Bottom Line: Government may not restrict religious beliefs, but may limit your actions.

Review Videos:

3.2 The First Amendment: The Establishment Clause

Listen to the screencast of today's post.

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

1. Read the Street Law summary of Engel v. Vitale, one of the required SCOTUS cases
2. Fill out the SCOTUS Required Cases Matrix for Engel v. Vitale
3. Complete the Flipgrid (check your email for instructions and link) on the Establishment Clause.

As you look at today's post, you will see there are quite a few court cases. Like an excessive amount. The only case that is required by the College Board is Engel v. Vitale, but I have included the others to show you how often the Establishment Clause comes up in a variety of situations, most commonly involving public schools and religion. The most important thing is that you understand what the Establishment Clause means (based on the Court's interpretation over the last 50+years) and how it continues to be litigated and debated today.

As always, email me if you have any questions or need help!

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 
________________________________________________

Today's Essential Question: How does the government effectively interpret and balance religious freedom and practice with respect to the First Amendment?

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.1: The interpretation and application of the First Amendment’s establishment and free exercise clauses reflect an ongoing debate over balancing majoritarian religions practice and free exercise, as represented by such cases as:

• Engel v. Vitale (1962), which declared school sponsorship of religious activities violates the establishment clause 
• Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), which held that compelling Amish students to attend school past the eighth grade violates the free exercise clause 

________________________________________________

The Establishment Clause

The 1st Amendment protects five basic freedoms: speech, religion, press, right to petition, and the right to assemble. However, freedom of religion is a little more nuanced and actually contains two clauses related to religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof..."

The clause in red is referred to as the Establishment Clause and the one in blue is called the Free Exercise Clause. Today's focus is on the difference between these two clauses dealing with freedom of religion.

Discuss with your group what you think the Establishment Clause means. Does it prohibit strictly a national religion or does it mean there should be no endorsement or favoritism towards a specific religion or religion in general? How is religion part of American life and government? What is meant by the separation between church and state?

Many of the Court's decisions about the Establishment Clause involve religion in schools. Here are some of the important cases. Must-know cases are in larger font.

Religion and the Establishment Clause in School

Everson v. Board of Education, 1947: Can parents of students attending a private school (i.e. St. James or Pius) be reimbursed for transportation (busing) costs for students?

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971: What can private/religious schools be reimbursed for? 

The Lemon Test: 

1. Does it serve a religious purpose?

2. Does it create excessive entanglement?

3. Does it have a primary purpose of advancing or inhibiting religion?

Which of the following passes the Lemon Test?

• math textbooks
• state mandated tests
• field trips
• teacher salary
• interpreter for a deaf student
• free/reduced lunch program

Engel v. Vitale, 1962: Can school officials (teachers, principals, etc) lead students in non-denominational prayer?
SCOTUS TEMPLATE

The prayer recited in New York that led to Engel v. Vitale:
Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen


Discuss the following example with your group:

Is it a prayer? (source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/estabinto.htm) The following verse was read each day to a Florida kindergarten class.  The school board said the purpose of the verse was to calm kids down and create a sense of appreciation for the world.  Is the verse a prayer?  How are students likely to interpret "you"? Could "you" be Mother Nature or a Giant Slug?

We thank you for the flowers so sweet;
We thank you for the food we eat;
We thank you for the birds that sing;
We thank you for everything.

Wallace v. Jaffree, 1985: Can schools have a moment of silence for meditation/prayer?

Lee v. Weisman, 1992: Can schools have sponsored prayer (by a school official or religious figure) at graduation ceremonies?

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 2000: Can a popularly elected student representative lead students in prayer over the loudspeaker at a sporting event?


Could a student valedictorian lead her classmates in prayer at graduation? Discuss with your group if you think this violates the Establishment Clause. Are the free exercise of religion and freedom of speech rights in conflict with the Establishment Clause?

Epperson v. Arkansas, 1968 : Can a school ban the teaching of evolution?

Edwards v. Aguilard, 1987: Can a school require the teaching of creationism?

Westside v. Mergens, 1990: Can student religious groups meet on school grounds?

Is the Establishment Clause violated by allowing an optional Bible study class once a week for elementary and middle school students during school hours?

Is the Establishment Clause violated by allowing high school cheerleaders to put Bible verses on their banners at football games?

Religion and the Establishment Clause in Public Places

Lynch v. Donnelly, 1984: Can religious figures (i.e. Nativity scene) be part of a Christmas display on city property?

Stone v. Graham, 1980 & Van Orden v. Perry, 2004: Can the Ten Commandments be posted on government property?

Marsh v. Chambers, 1983 & Town of Greece, NY v. Galloway, 2014: Can legislative or town hall meetings begin with a prayer?

Do you think the city of Republic's city logo violates the Establishment Clause? Why or why not?

The court's ruling.

Other Establishment Clause Resources

First Amendment Center: Establishment Clause

Exploring Constitutional Conflicts: The Establishment Clause