1 / 8

Today’s Agenda

Today’s Agenda. KYCE Presentation & Quiz [GRAHAM]. First Amendment Webquest Research Questions. What prompted the case (background)? Decision of the case? For or against the plaintiff ___votes to ___ What effect did this ruling have on the interpretation of the first amendment?.

carnig
Download Presentation

Today’s Agenda

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Today’s Agenda • KYCE Presentation & Quiz [GRAHAM]

  2. First Amendment WebquestResearch Questions • What prompted the case (background)? • Decision of the case? • For or against the plaintiff ___votes to ___ • What effect did this ruling have on the interpretation of the first amendment? YOU MUST BE ABLE TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

  3. First Amendment WebquestPoster Example Novak v. Miami (2013) Ryan Novak was arrested for disturbing the peace when he burned a Lebron James jersey and verbally taunted several Miami Heat fans during the 2011 NBA Finals. Several Miami fans attacked Novak, who easily handled them, but it caused a massive riot. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled in favor of Novak because… This case illustrates what is now known as the “Punk Doctrine” where citizens have every right to call Lebron James any name they like because he is a punk.

  4. First Amendment Cases of Note • Schenck v. United States (1919) • Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942) • Terminiello v. Chicago (1949) • New York Times v. United States (1971) • United States v. Eichman (1990) • Cantwell v. State of Connecticut (1940) • Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) • Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. School Dist. (1969) • Roth v. United States (1957) • Stanley v. Georgia (1969) • Miller v. California (1973) * • Jenkins v. Georgia (1974)

  5. Obscenity • One of the most perplexing of all speech-related problems has been the issue of obscenity and what to do about it.  • A wide variety of tests have been employed by individual justices to determine what is constitutionally proscribable obscenity, and for long periods of time, no single approach commanded the support of a majority of the Court.  • The difficulty of defining obscenity was memorably summarized by Justice Stewart in a concurring opinion when he said: "I know it when I see it." 

  6. The "Miller Test" for Obscenity • The work in question must depict or describe sexual conduct. • The prohibited conduct must be specifically described in the law. • The work, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.  (the "SLAPS" test) • The work, taken as a whole and applying contemporarycommunitystandards, must appeal to prurient interest in sex. • The work must portray sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, applying contemporary community standards.

  7. Critical Engagement Questions • Are all forms of speech protected? • How is our society shaped by the First Amendment? • Do First Amendment "rules" change depending on the situation? • Have court interpretations of the First Amendment changed over time? • How will new technologies affect the First Amendment?

  8. The First Amendment 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.

More Related