https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o Section 2-4 en-us 2017-12-07 23:43:34 UTC 2026-01-13 23:22:00 UTC hello@padlet.com 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214359288 The 1st Amendment set out guarantees of religious freedom. Which prohibits an establishment of religion in the establishment clause  and any arbitrary interference by the government in the free exercise. The constitutional guarantees were out of opposition to government-established churches that were raised in the reformation. The absolute religious freedom in Virginia by declaring it could not require anyone to support any religious institution if they do not want to.  ]]> 2017-12-07 23:47:55 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214359288 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214360107 The "wall of separation" between church and state. The operation and formal institutions of church and government are constitutionally separated in this country. Most of the contributions to religious sects are free form, state, and local taxation. A few cases involve the government and religion but, it did not involve a direct consideration of the "wall of separation".  ]]> 2017-12-07 23:58:53 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214360107 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214361093 Most important case having to do with religion except the Establishment Clause was Pierce v. Society of Sisters which held the court an Oregon compulsory school attendance law to be unconstitutional. That law required that parents to send their children to public schools to eliminate private and parochial schools. The court did not address the establishment Clause question. The was unreasonable interference with the liberty of the parents not being able to direct the education of their children. Which ended up being in conflict with Due Process Clause of the 14 amendment. ]]> 2017-12-08 00:10:09 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214361093 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214361745 The case of Lemon v. Kurtzman the Supreme Court held that Establishment Clause to prevent sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity. The Pennsylvania law provided money for the private school. The court introduce the Lemon test to decide if an establishment of religion which a law must have a secular not religious purpose, it must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and not foster an excessive entanglement of government and religion. Court has not found laws to provide public aid to church schools.      ]]> 2017-12-08 00:18:47 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214361745 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214364589 The court has now decided several cases involving the recitation of prayers and reading of the bible in public schools however, the Engel v. Vitale the court outlawed the use of a prayer written by the new York state. The Supreme Court held that the constitutional prohibition against laws in this country is not part  of the business of government to compose official prayers for any group of government.  ]]> 2017-12-08 00:49:32 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214364589 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214365624 The courts view of religion in school is somewhat bias. If kids parents are religious and want them to grow up with the religion they are in, they should be able to go to religion school. But when they grow up they can decide if they want to follow their parents steps and grow up to their religion they can stay like that. However the private schools get more agreement but not as much as religion schools even though they are private too. ]]> 2017-12-08 01:01:08 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214365624 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214366587 The Free Exercise Clause does not give anyone the right to violate criminal laws, offend public morals, or threaten community safety because it might be done in some religion form. The constitutional guarantee of religious freedom that each person has the right to believe whatever they choose to believe in matters of religion.   ]]> 2017-12-08 01:11:24 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214366587 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214367835 The guarantees of free speech and press in the 1st and 14th amendments have two important purposes which are that each person has a right to free expression and that all of the people a wide-ranging discussion of public affairs. Which the 1st and 14th amendments give people the rights of their say and hear what the rest have to also say.  ]]> 2017-12-08 01:23:05 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214367835 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214756851 Libel means that it is false and malicious use of printed words. Slander means the false and malicious use of spoken words. Malicious is a word that o injure a person's character or reputation or to expose them to public contempt. ]]> 2017-12-10 02:45:48 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214756851 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214757407 Sedition is a crime of attempting to overthrow the government by force or disrupt of its lawful activities by violence laws. Seditious speech is advocating or urging, of such conduct and is not protected by the 1st amendment.    ]]> 2017-12-10 03:07:46 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214757407 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214757521 The Smith Law makes it a crime for anyone that advocate the violent overthrow of the government of the U.S.. It also distributes any material that teaches or advises violent overthrow or if they take any part of a group with aim.  Which it also violated the 1st amendment. ]]> 2017-12-10 03:11:07 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214757521 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214758440 The court overturn the smith act because of several communist party leaders. It held the urge for people to believe in contrast to urging tat person to do something that cannot be made illegal. The court upheld the constitutionality of the law but made it hard to enforce the smith act. ]]> 2017-12-10 03:26:36 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214758440 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214759016 A person can make face expression to say whatever they want to say or carry/ wear  and armband. The symbolic speech has not given blanket 1st amendment protection to the means of expression.]]> 2017-12-10 03:44:04 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214759016 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214759824 It involves  the patrolling of a business site by workers that are in strike. They attempt to inform the public of the controversy and to persuade others to not deal with firm involved. It is protected by the 1st amendment and 14 amendment. ]]> 2017-12-10 04:01:52 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214759824 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214760201 The U.S. v. O'Brien involved four young men that burned their draft cards to protect the war in Vietnam. They were convicted of violating the federal law that made their act a crime. Not allowing them the 1st amendment. ]]> 2017-12-10 04:12:11 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214760201 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214760556 This is one of the cases that came down to symbolic speech. Several of the students wore black armbands to school to dramatize their opposition to the war in Vietnam and were suspended by the district.  The school violates the students right to free expression.]]> 2017-12-10 04:22:26 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214760556 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214761709 Burning the American flag as an of political protest is an expressive conduct protected by the 1st and 14th amendment. The majority rule of this case was decided that the state authorities had violated the protesters rights. Same happened with the Eichman by rejecting several attempts to propose a constitutional amendments to outlaw flag burning.  
         ]]> 2017-12-10 04:56:28 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214761709 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214764397 In the most extreme situations the government cannot place any prior restraint on written or spoken expression. Its concept is basic as like the 1st and 14 amendments the protection of freedom of expression]]> 2017-12-10 06:15:32 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214764397 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214764595 Many reporters and news organization insist that they must have the right to refuse testify to protect their sources. Without this right they cannot assure confidentiality, that is why they won't reveal important or sensitive information. The shield laws give reporters some protection against having to disclose their sources or reveal other confidential information in legal proceeding in those states.   ]]> 2017-12-10 06:20:34 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214764595 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214764905 It is a speech for business purposes for advertising most of the time it has been found that the 1st and 14 amendment do not protect this speech. The court has held unconstitutional a State law that prohibited the newspaper advertising of abortion and forbidding the advertisements of prescription drug prices. Not everything is protected but the government can prohibit false and misleading advertisements and illegal goods or services. There has been many arbitrary restrictions on advertising. Such things like smoking, liquor, casino, etc. had been prohibited for advertising.  ]]> 2017-12-10 06:26:45 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214764905 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214765322 The federal and state laws have made obscenity material illegal and the courts have agreed that it is not protected by the 1st or 14 amendments. They aren't that sure of what obscene means but happens to appear on television today and would be banned as obscenity today. ]]> 2017-12-10 06:35:18 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214765322 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214765528 The case of Miller the court laid down a three part test to define obscenity. A book, recording film or some other material is legally obscene if the average person applying to contemporary community standards takes the works and finds it excited lust. Also if the work describes in a patently offensive way and if the work lacks in a serious literary artistic, political, or scientific value. ]]> 2017-12-10 06:39:49 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214765528 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214766062 The constitution protects the rights of the people to assemble to express their views. It also protects the people's right to petition to bring their views to the attention of public officials like written petitions, letters, etc. It is also written in the first amendment which is also protected by the 14 amendment. It protects the rights of peaceable assembly and petition and does not give anyone else the right to incite the other to violate.  ]]> 2017-12-10 06:54:00 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214766062 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214766399 They cannot make assembles that a makes noise or any other diversion near a school because it has a disruptive effect. They cannot make parades near courthouse when it has to influence court proceedings. It is also unconstitutional for people to protest in the sidewalks or if they are in any way disturbing those who pass by or the buildings around them.  ]]> 2017-12-10 07:01:26 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214766399 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214766786 The government cannot limit the content of political speech, under some circumstances it is reasonable for governments to limit the time and place of political speech. Which they balance the right of free speech to gather and move without interference from protesters. However the free speech zones have made controversy over the years.  ]]> 2017-12-10 07:07:26 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214766786 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767000 The court said that the 1st and 14 amendment rights to trespass on private property even to express political views. No one has a constitutional right to do things like handing out political leaflets or asking to sign petitions.  ]]> 2017-12-10 07:13:21 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767000 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767334 They have the right to join with others to promote political, economic, and social causes which they are guarantee of freedom of assembly. It is said in many different ways in the constitution.   ]]> 2017-12-10 07:20:32 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767334 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767528 This case required the Alabama branch of the NAACP to disclose the names of all of the members in the state. When the organization refuse the court fined $100,000. However, the court overturned because they cannot find a legitimate reason on why the state should have the NAACP's membership list. ]]> 2017-12-10 07:23:39 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767528 444002844 https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767718 A person cannot be fired from a job because of political associations and a person cannot be required to disclose their political associations in order to be licensed to practice law. ]]> 2017-12-10 07:27:51 UTC https://padlet.com/444002844/d2307d1b056o/wish/214767718