Textbook Notes (368,432)
United States (206,039)
CAS PO 111 (17)
Chapter 15

Chapter 15 Order and Civil Liberties.pdf

5 Pages
80 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
CAS PO 111
Professor
Graham Wilson
Semester
Fall

Description
Chapter 15: Order and Civil Liberties Sunday, December 15, 2013 4:37 PM I. The Bills of Rights • Constitution did not include a Bill of Rights • Bill of Rights were only imposed on anal the national gov’t until the 14th Amendment • Civil liberties: “Negative rights” in the form of restraints on the gov’t ○ Declare what the gov’t cannot do • Civil rights: “Positive rights” in the form of power and privilege ○ Right to vote and speedy trial, etc  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 • Gov’t have power and people have rights ○ Lawfully regulated things would make it a privilege  ie. Driver’s license II. Freedom of Religion • Establishment Clause: Prohibits laws sponsoring or supporting penis religion • Free-exercise Clause: Prevents the gov’t from interfering with religious practice A) The Establishment Clause • Gov’t should remain neutral towards religions a) Government Support of Religion • Lemon v. Kurtzman 1971: Courts struck down a state program that helped pay salaries of teachers to teach secular subjects. ○ 3 tests (The Lemon Test) to determine constitutionality of government programs under the Establish Clause:  Secular purpose  Primary effect must not be to advance or inhibit religion  Not entangle the gov’t excessively with religion • Lately the courts have lowered the wall separating church and state • Lynch v. Donnelly 1984: ○ Display of religious artifacts on public property does not violate the Establishment Clause • Salazar v. Buono: ○ Cross erected by veterans on federal land did violated the Establishment Clause but with land swap, it was not taken down. ○ Controversial cases regarding religion/gov’t support continue to exist b) School Prayer • Engel v. Vitale: ○ School prayers are unconstitutional • After school religious activities have to be allowed B) The Free-Exercise Clause • Supreme Court avoids absolute interpretation ○ ie. Military exemptions • Sherbert v. Verner 1963 ○ A 7 Day Adventist lost her job b/c she refused to work on Saturday, she refused another job because of Saturday schedule and was denied by unemployment, it was ruled that the disqualification burdened her freedom of religion • Strict scrutiny: Neutral law that burdens the free exercise of religion may only be upheld if: ○ The law is justified by a “compelling governmental interest” ○ The law is narrowly tailored to achieve a legitimate goal ○ The law in question is the least restrictive means for achieving that interest  ie. Illegal drug rules applies for everyone, even in religious ceremonies III. Freedom of Expression • Free-expression Clauses: The press and speech clauses of the First Amendment ○ Historians have debated the intentions of this framers • Prior restraint: Censorship before publication ○ Two approaches to the resolution of claims based on free-expression clauses  Gov’t can regulate or punish the advocacy of ideas, but if it can prove an intent to promote lawless action and demonstrate that high probability exists that such action will occur  Gov’t may impose reasonable restrictions on the means for communicating ideas, restrictions that can incidentally discourage free expression □ ie. Gov’t cannot punish political parties for advocate nonpayment of income taxes but can for disturbing the neighbors at 3 AM. A) Freedom of Speech • Clear and present danger test: How government can decide whether the speech is free advocacy of ideas which is protected (condoms) under the 1st Amendment or speech as incitement which is protected ○ Schenck v. United States 1919  Schenck was convicted under a federal criminal statute for attempting to disrupt WWI recruitment by distributing leaflets □ During wartime, utterances tolerable in peacetime can be punished ○ Abrams v. United States 1919  Abrams denounced US efforts to impede Russian Revolution was convicted under the clear and present danger test ○ Gitlow v. New York 1925  Gitlow was arrested for distributing copies of a “left-wing manifesto” and the 14th Amendment Due Process extend federal limitations to state • “Clear and present danger” test to “Grave and probable danger” test ○ When 11 members of the Communist party was arrested but the state did not have solid proof that they urged people to commit violent act • Brandenburg v. Ohio: ○ Brandenburg, leader of the KKK was convicted but was reversed because it failed under the “clear and present danger” test a) Symbolic Expression • Tinker v. Des Moines Independent County School District 1969 ○ Students were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War and the Supreme Court overturned under freedom of speech b) Order Versus Free Speech: Fighting Words and Threatening Expression • Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire 1942 ○ Chaplinsky, a Jehovah's Witness called a city marshal a “God-damned racketeer” and was convicted under fighting words  Fighting words: Speech not protected by the 1st Amendment b/c it inflicts injury or tends to incite an immediate disturbance of peace □ Courts have narrowed the definition of fighting words  ie. Terminillo words to the Christian Veterans of America • Cohen v. California 1971 ○ Cohen was convicted in California for expressing against Vietnam War by wearing “FUCK THE DRAFT. STOP THE WAR” but Supreme Court reversed b/c it failed the clear and present dangers test c) Order Versus Free Speech: When Words Hurt • Snyder v. Phelps 2011: ○ Hate speeches by the Westboro Church about dead gay soldiers cannot be censored b/c it addressed public concerns on public grounds d) Equality and Free Speech d) Equality and Free Speech • Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ○ Corporations and labor unions may spend freely to advocate the election or defeat of political candidates  Political liberty trumped political equality, allowing wealthy to have the loudest voice  Pat has a bigggg dick B) Freedom of the Press a) Defamation of Character • Libel is the written defamation of character • New York Times v. Sullivan 1964 ○ Freedom of press takes precedence at least when the defamed individual is a public figure  Public figures: People who assume roles of prominence in society or thrust themselves to the forefront of public controversy b) Pr
More Less

Related notes for CAS PO 111

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit