Ch. 5 Civil Liberties

Improved Essays
Ch.5 Civil Liberties

We as the Citizens of the United States are given Civil liberties which are the protections the Constistution provides against the abuse of government power. Many people think of them as a set of principles that grant us the protection of our freedom all the time but that 's not completely correct. Even though our Civil liberties protect our freedom it doesn 't mean that we can do whatever we wish, For example The Smith Act made it a criminal offense to advocate violent overthrow of the government or to organize or be a member of any group or society devoted to such advocacy. Another liberty given to us was the Freedom of speech and press but The Sedition Act made it a crime to write, utter, or publish any false, scandalous
…show more content…
It is a standard imposed by the courts when considering the validity of legislation that touches upon constitutional interests. Another one of the six tests is neutrality. Neutrality is any restriction on speech that disrupts other people in their exercise of their rights. Neutrality and Least Restrictive Means are different because least restrictive means only apply if its necessary to restrict the exercise of one right the protect exercise of another whereas Neutrality is any restriction on speech. Another type of speech is symbolic speech which is an act that conveys a political message. Even though the court reasoned the same protection as real speech woud open the door to permitting all manner of illegal actions if perpetrator meant thereby to send a message you can 't just ordinarily claim that an illegal act should be protected because that action is meant to convey a political message. An example of this could be Reno v. ACLU in 1997, a law that banned sending indecent material to minors over the internet because its unconstitutional and it was proved unconstitutional because “indecent” is too vague and broad a term. Many people know the language of the First Amendment though many are not aware of how complex the legal interpretations of these provisions have become. The First Amendment has two part and the first part know as the free-exercsie clause is a little more clearer than the second part but still very confusing. Since the First Amendment has been applied to states via due-process clause of the fourteenth amendment, it means that state governments can 't pass such laws either so the courts are practically treating religion like speech. In simpler terms you can do or say what you want as long as it doesn 't cause harm to others. The Establishment Clause on the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The passing of the law Sedition Act of 1798 created a great debate over the meaning of freedom of speech and the press because it limited what people could say. The two opposing views were crafted by Henry Lee and James Madison. Lee believed that freedom of speech and the press meant exactly what it did when Blackstone wrote it for England, which is that it is a freedom from prior restraint and nothing more. However, Madison stated that the American concept of freedom of the press and speech went beyond what is stated in the common law of England, it protects a person’s right to criticize the government and government officials. Both sides have well thought out reasons as to why their view is correct, however I strongly believe that Madison’s…

    • 798 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This would make the legislature unconstitutional and the legislature could be modified or scrapped entirely to fit within the framework of the US Constitution. States cannot enact a statute that violates or infringes upon the first amendment rights of an entity; the entities in this case being GMI and HDTV. In this case the free speech being violated is these companies right to commercial speech which is protected under the first amendment. However, limits can be placed upon commercial free speech, but in this case the limit restricts commercial free speech too heavily and the purpose is unsupported for protecting…

    • 972 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    These certain freedoms that have been fought for in court to give American citizens the right to express and protest their believes without fear of breaking the law. However, our freedom of speech does not include inciting actions that could harm others, “making or distributing obscene material”, burning draft cards, students advocating drug use at school events, students delivering obscene speech at school events, and students writing articles in school newspapers about their objections to the administrators. (United States Courts). Many believe that the constitution specifically restricts hate speech but this is false. In fact, “hateful ideas are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas.…

    • 912 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The U.S. would not be better off without the "Bill of Rights", in fact America would presumably fall apart without it. The Bill of Rights has protected the citizens of America from being attacked and treated unjustly by the government as well as others. Without the Bill of Rights, Congress would possess the ability to have complete control over the citizens, meaning they could search ones house without a warrant or they could make it illegal to have an opinion and to practice a religion. Essentially, many of the privileges we have today would no longer be given to us without the "Bill of Rights". Law-abiding citizens definitely need the "Bill of Rights" as without it they may no longer be law-abiding.…

    • 1144 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I. Incitement of imminent violence The first issue is what constitutional argument could be made against Tax’s conviction under the Sedition Statute. Under the US constitution First Amendment, laws that limit freedom of speech are unconstitutional. However, certain types of unprotected speeches that advocate violence, fighting words, hostile audience speech, obscene speech and defamatory speeches can be regulated. Fighting words is a speech that is more than annoying or offensive and causes a genuine likelihood of imminent violence by hostile audience. The speech must advocate illegal conduct, not just an abstract.…

    • 503 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Plessy V. Ferguson

    • 1576 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The court case Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith, the court decided that they could not use drugs for religious purposes because of legitimate state interest. Now look at a different part of the 1st Amendment about freedom of Speech. The government can restrict on what you can and cannot say. An example is the “clear and present danger” doctrine, which restricts what people can and cannot say. A court case that deals with this idea were seen in the Schenck v. United States case, when Mr. Schenck was handing out pamphlets saying to boycott the war, he was arrested him for violating the “clear and present danger” doctrine.…

    • 1576 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Legal Policy Essay The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech, as considered being one of the most fundamental protection of the American way of life in a democratic society. However, it is also very clear that there are certain forms of speech are prohibited. For example, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, “the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic”; other limitations to freedom of speech include defamation, hate speech obscenity, and child pornography. Among all the situations with controversy, Constitution generally prohibits government’s regulation of speech, even when the speaker’s opinions are reprehensible to…

    • 995 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Patriot Act Pros And Cons

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Wiretapping is an infringement of a person’s rights. The United States has the power to do this under the U.S. Patriot Act, but they actually are only allowed to monitor a conversation if they have a probable cause and a warrant. A great quote regarding NSA Wiretapping in relation to the Patriot Act comes from Dean Heller, a senator from Nevada. He said in a press release that “there is a fine line between protecting our nation and protecting our Fourth Amendment rights.” (Heller, 2013) This quote goes to show that while the nation should be protected, the government should not have the right to blatantly overlook the rights of the people of the country. The elastic clause was a major factor in the establishment of the Patriot Act.…

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    There are more important issues than arguing over something that has been decided by the Supreme Court and something that is even protected by the Constitution. It is true that “Any messages that burning the flag might convey easily can be communicated in other ways” (Allen). However, the Constitution does not say anything against it. People may want to change the law because they believe that burning the flag should be a crime. Changing the law would be unconstitutional since freedom of speech is under amendment one and changing the Bill of Rights on its own is not possible.…

    • 859 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    It allows Americans to express their voices, either by speech or in writing, without the fear of prosecution. The government still has the power in certain circumstances to limit the freedom of speech and press. However, in the New York Times v. United States case, where the United States government argued that the release of the controversial Pentagon Papers threatened national security, the Supreme Court ruled that prior restraint (“restraining an activity before that activity has actually occurred”), intruded on the freedom of expression (Bardes, Schmidt, and Shelley 113). The Supreme Court has viewed other forms of speech such as symbolic speech, commercial speech, and advocacy speech, where it was ruled that as long as the type of speech does not harm or infringe on the safety of others, it is protected under the Bill of Rights. One of these protections is the imminent lawless action test, which determines the legality of an advocacy speech.…

    • 1261 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays