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
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