a. Although the First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, speech is heavily regulated; and has been for quite some time. According to Tedford and Herbeck on page 50, in the case of Abrams v. United States in 1919, Jacob Abrams and fellow Russian immigrants who were all living in the U.S. at the time decided to print off “seditious messages during time of war” (Tedford&Herbeck). All men were convicted under the Espionage Act of 1918. They were arrested due to passing out pamphlets that manifested their disapproval and overall concerns regarding the war. Fast forward 20+ years, and the Smith Act of 1940(Tedford&Herbeck, 2017) was enacted, which concludes that anyone who knowingly distributes any materials
…show more content…
The Smith act was set into place in order to halt any further free speech liberties that could possibly result in the overthrowing or the revolt of the government. Free speech definitely sounds as though you can speak or preach about what you want, when you want; however, it’s limitations are in place in order to prevent any harm to citizens or to the government as well.
b. In Chapter 5, the case Cox v. Cohn 1975, dealt with disclosure limits regarding a “juvenile rape-murder victim” (Tedford&Herbeck, 124). The court system ruled since the reporters did not mention the victim’s name in public documents, that they did not violate any laws in place. Just like the free speech clause in the first amendment, the freedom of the press also has limitations and boundaries in which they are required to follow in order to prevent damaging harm to others, or in this case, the inappropriateness of revealing a juvenile victim’s name out into the public sphere.
i. It was stated on page 124 that the “Supreme Court has recognized a limited constitutional right of privacy” (Tedford&Herbeck, 124). The courts over time have adapted rights and regulations that respect the right of privacy for victims and innocents. There eventually were 4 torts that have become implemented in order to control privacy and to protect people’s and organization’s reputations. The 4 privacy torts
The Smith act was set into place in order to halt any further free speech liberties that could possibly result in the overthrowing or the revolt of the government. Free speech definitely sounds as though you can speak or preach about what you want, when you want; however, it’s limitations are in place in order to prevent any harm to citizens or to the government as well.
b. In Chapter 5, the case Cox v. Cohn 1975, dealt with disclosure limits regarding a “juvenile rape-murder victim” (Tedford&Herbeck, 124). The court system ruled since the reporters did not mention the victim’s name in public documents, that they did not violate any laws in place. Just like the free speech clause in the first amendment, the freedom of the press also has limitations and boundaries in which they are required to follow in order to prevent damaging harm to others, or in this case, the inappropriateness of revealing a juvenile victim’s name out into the public sphere.
i. It was stated on page 124 that the “Supreme Court has recognized a limited constitutional right of privacy” (Tedford&Herbeck, 124). The courts over time have adapted rights and regulations that respect the right of privacy for victims and innocents. There eventually were 4 torts that have become implemented in order to control privacy and to protect people’s and organization’s reputations. The 4 privacy torts