Essential question
Download
1 / 27

Essential Question - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 41 Views
  • Uploaded on

Essential Question. How does the Constitution protect citizen rights?. Citizen Rights (1). Freedom of Speech. Democratic government requires every person has the right to speak freely. Pure Speech. Verbal expression of opinion before an audience that has chosen to listen. Symbolic Speech.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Essential Question' - sandro


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Essential question
Essential Question

  • How does the Constitution protect citizen rights?



Freedom of speech
Freedom of Speech

  • Democratic government requires every person has the right to speak freely


Pure speech
Pure Speech

  • Verbal expression of opinion before an audience that has chosen to listen


Symbolic speech
Symbolic Speech

  • Using actions and symbols to express opinions


Texas v johnson 1989
Texas v. Johnson (1989)

  • Flag-burning is protected as symbolic speech


Limiting speech
Limiting Speech

  • Right of free speech must be balanced against the need to protect society


Seditious speech
Seditious Speech

  • Any speech urging resistance to lawful authority or advocating the overthrow of the government


Court guidelines
Court Guidelines

  • Three constitutional tests to establish limits on speech:

  • The clear and present danger rule

  • The bad tendency doctrine

  • The preferred position doctrine


Clear and present danger
Clear and Present Danger

  • When the speech in question clearly presents an immediate danger


Schenck v united states 1919
Schenck v. United States (1919)

  • Schenck urged draftees to obstruct the war effort in WWI

  • During wartime this speech threatened the well-being of the nation


The bad tendency doctrine
The Bad Tendency Doctrine

  • Gitlow v. New York (1925)

  • Speech restricted if it had a tendency to lead to illegal action


Preferred position doctrine
Preferred Position Doctrine

  • First Amendment freedoms hold a preferred position over competing interests

  • Government must show limiting them is absolutely necessary


Brandenberg v ohio
Brandenberg v. Ohio

  • KKK leader arrested for refusing to end a rally and cross burning

  • Court ruled in his favor as there was no evidence his speech intended to create immediate acts of violence


Defamatory speech
Defamatory Speech

  • 1st Amendment does not protect false speech that damages a person’s name

  • Slander – spoken

  • Libel - written


Fighting words
“Fighting Words”

  • Words so insulting they provoke immediate violence

  • Do not constitute free speech


Freedom of the press
Freedom of the Press

  • At times the right of the press to gather and publish information conflicts with other rights


Prior restraint
Prior Restraint

  • Censoring of the press by government

  • Can only occur in cases related to national security


Sheppard v maxwell 1966
Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966)

  • Overturned conviction of murderer because of pre-trial press coverage


Reno v american civil liberties union 1997
Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997)

  • Internet speech deserves the same First Amendment protection as print media


Freedom of assembly
Freedom of Assembly

  • Right of the people to peaceably assemble and petition the government


Dejonge v oregon 1937
DeJonge v. Oregon (1937)

  • DeJonge was convicted of holding a Communist Party meeting

  • Conviction overturned as peaceful assembly for discussion


Public assembly
Public Assembly

  • Freedom includes right to parade and demonstrate in public


Cox v new hampshire 1941
Cox v. New Hampshire (1941)

  • A city can require a parade permit in order to march because of safety to citizens


Grayned v city of rockford
Grayned v. City of Rockford

  • Upheld a ban on demonstrations near schools that were intended to disrupt classes


The skokie case 1977
The Skokie Case (1977)

  • The American Nazi Party planned to hold a rally in a Jewish suburb of Chicago

  • Court allowed the march


Feiner v new york 1950
Feiner v. New York (1950)

  • Police arrested a man whose public speaking incited a violent crowd response

  • Court upheld his arrest as an act to keep the peace


ad