1 / 10

The Supreme Court & the First Amendment

The Supreme Court & the First Amendment. Tinker v. Des Moines.

scollins
Download Presentation

The Supreme Court & the First Amendment

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. The Supreme Court & the First Amendment

  2. Tinker v. Des Moines Three public school students wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. They were suspended from school for refusing to remove them. John Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt were high school students, and Mary Beth Tinker was in 8th grade at the junior high. Upon hearing about their plan to wear the armbands, the school district created a policy forbidding armbands. The three students wore the armbands anyway, and they were suspended from school. They sued the district for violating their 1st Amendment rights.

  3. Bethel School District v. Fraser A public school student was suspended for giving a speech at a school assembly that included indecent content. Matthew Fraser was a high school student who gave a speech to nominate another student for a student government office. Approximately 600 other students voluntarily attended the assembly at which the speech was given. The speech included repeated use of an “elaborate, graphic, and explicit sexual metaphor,” in reference to the other student. The speech caused his fellow students to yell and make obscene gestures. He later admitted using sexual innuendo in the speech and was suspended. He was also banned from speaking at graduation. The school had a standing policy against disruptive conduct. He sued the school for violating his right to free speech.

  4. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier A public school principal removed two articles from the school newspaper due to content he considered inappropriate. The school newspaper at Hazelwood East High School, “Spectrum,” was produced by the journalism class. The district’s Board of Education paid for the publication. Two articles were removed from an issue because the principal found their content objectionable. One story was about teen pregnancy, and the other was about divorce. Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other students from the class sued the school, claiming their 1st Amendment rights had been violated.

  5. Morse v. Frederick A public school student was suspended for displaying a banner promoting drug use at a school event. In 2002, the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska on the way to the winter games in Salt Lake City, Utah. Since it passed right in front of the public high school, students attended with their teachers as a school-sponsored event. As the runners passed by, a senior named Joseph Frederick, with the help of others, held up a 14-foot banner that read: “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” The principal, Deborah Morse, confiscated the banner and suspended Mr. Frederick. Mr. Frederick sued the school, and the principal, for violating his rights.

  6. Santa Fe School District v. Jane Doe A Texas school district allowed a student "chaplain," who had been elected by fellow students, to lead a prayer over the public address system before home football games. Several students and their parents anonymously sued the school district, claiming a violation of what's known as the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

  7. Wisconsin v. Yoder Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, both members of the Old Order Amish religion, and Adin Yutzy, a member of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church, were prosecuted under a Wisconsin law that required all children to attend public schools until age 16. The three parents refused to send their children to such schools after the eighth grade, arguing that high school attendance was contrary to their religious beliefs.

  8. New York Times v. Sullivan This case concerns a full-page ad in the New York Times which alleged that the arrest of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. for perjury in Alabama was part of a campaign to destroy King's efforts to integrate public facilities and encourage blacks to vote. L. B. Sullivan, the Montgomery city commissioner, filed a libel action against the newspaper and four black ministers who were listed as endorsers of the ad, claiming that the allegations against the Montgomery police defamed him personally. Under Alabama law, Sullivan did not have to prove that he had been harmed; and a defense claiming that the ad was truthful was unavailable since the ad contained factual errors. Sullivan won a $500,000 judgment.

  9. Schenck v. United States During World War I, Schenck mailed circulars to draftees. The circulars suggested that the draft was a monstrous wrong motivated by the capitalist system. The circulars urged "Do not submit to intimidation" but advised only peaceful action such as petitioning to repeal the Conscription Act. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and to obstruct recruitment. Schenck sued claiming that his first amendment right of freedom of speech

  10. New York Times v. United States In what became known as the "Pentagon Papers Case," the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials belonging to a classified Defense Department study regarding the history of United States activities in Vietnam. The President argued that prior restraint (ability to censor information before publication) was necessary to protect national security. The New York Times argued that prior restraint violated their right to freedom of the press.

More Related