# data[].attributes.body
This case was argued on December 11th 2002, it was Virginia versus Barry Black, Richard Elliott, and Jonathan O’Mara. They were convicted separately for violating a statue. Barry Black was found guilty. O’Mara pleaded guilty on the charges of violating the stature but challenged the constitutionality. In Elliott's trial the judge had not given an “instruction on the statues prima facie (Latin for “first glance/appearance”) evidence provision”. So the cross-burning statue was unconstitutional but on its face the probability of prosecution under the statue isn't likely. The reason for this is the right of protected speech. The 1st amendment right was violated.

# data[].attributes.body
freedom of assembly

# data[].attributes.body
People start to get upset with Trump violating the First Amendment by blocking people who disagree with him on Twitter. He was depriving people of their right to speak freely. It was argued that Twitter is uncharted territory. The Judges however, said that Trump chose a public platform and opened it to millions of people and that he may not selectively exclude those who disagree with him.

# data[].attributes.body
A 40-foot high Christian cross in Maryland is maintained by the government. The statue however does not violate the 1st Amendment of religion, because it was made a century ago for fallen soldiers for WW1.

# data[].attributes.body
freedom of petition

# data[].attributes.body
This case was argued on February 26 2002, this was the village of Stratton versus Tract Soc’y of New York, inc. The  Tract Soc’y of New York, inc. is a group of Jehovah’s Witnesses that distribute religious materials, brought an action for injunctive relief, claiming that the ordinance violates their 1st amendment rights. Stratton wanted canvassers to obtain a permit from the mayors office prior to entering a private residential property. The Court of Appeals concluded that Stratton’s view on protecting its residents from “fraud” were sufficient bases to justify the regulation. The courts final ruling said that making going door-to-door a misdemeanor without a permit from the mayor violates the 1st amendment rights of those going door-to-door.

# data[].attributes.body
freedom of religion

# data[].attributes.body
freedom of speech

# data[].attributes.body
freedom of press