Freedom of speech is a river that gives sustenance to the people along its banks so that they may grow independent and strong. Without the freedoms given to citizens in the first amendment, no one would be able to express their opinions and ideas about anything. Added to the constitution in 1789, the Bill of Rights gives us civil liberties and prevents the government from having too much power.
According to the first amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’ or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This means the first amendment protects certain …show more content…
In 2003, the case Interactive Digital Software Ass’n v. St. Louis County, a St. Louis ordinance made it unlawful to allow minors to play violent videogames without their parents’ consent. This lawsuit was filed against St. Louis County by the interactive digital software association and other organizations and companies that create, distribute, and sell or rent videogames that claimed that the statute was an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. The court declared the statute unconstitutional, hold that the ordinance violated the first amendment. The court classified the ordinance as a content-based restriction. It applied only to “violent” videogames and thus regulates videogames based on their content. St. Louis failed to prove that the violent videogames were harmful to minors’ well-being. The court remanded the case "for entry of an injunction" against enforcement of the ordinance. Petitioners are not always successful in proving their rights were violated. In another case, A.M. v. Taconic Hills Central School District, a student’s freedom to share her faith at school without punishment was at stake. In 2009, AM. was elected as co-president of her student council. She was to give a “brief message” at a graduation ceremony in her middle school’s auditorium. A few days before the ceremony, her English teacher asked to review her draft speech for “punctuation and grammar” errors. Upon reading the speech, her teacher recommended their principal review it as well. At the meeting her principal set up to review her speech, he requested that A.M. remove the religious message in her speech. She refused and the principal contacted the superintendent who also believed A.M. should not be permitted to speak at the ceremony unless she removed the religious sentence from her speech. She complied and delivered the speech without the religious content. In January 2010, the student filed
According to the first amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’ or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This means the first amendment protects certain …show more content…
In 2003, the case Interactive Digital Software Ass’n v. St. Louis County, a St. Louis ordinance made it unlawful to allow minors to play violent videogames without their parents’ consent. This lawsuit was filed against St. Louis County by the interactive digital software association and other organizations and companies that create, distribute, and sell or rent videogames that claimed that the statute was an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. The court declared the statute unconstitutional, hold that the ordinance violated the first amendment. The court classified the ordinance as a content-based restriction. It applied only to “violent” videogames and thus regulates videogames based on their content. St. Louis failed to prove that the violent videogames were harmful to minors’ well-being. The court remanded the case "for entry of an injunction" against enforcement of the ordinance. Petitioners are not always successful in proving their rights were violated. In another case, A.M. v. Taconic Hills Central School District, a student’s freedom to share her faith at school without punishment was at stake. In 2009, AM. was elected as co-president of her student council. She was to give a “brief message” at a graduation ceremony in her middle school’s auditorium. A few days before the ceremony, her English teacher asked to review her draft speech for “punctuation and grammar” errors. Upon reading the speech, her teacher recommended their principal review it as well. At the meeting her principal set up to review her speech, he requested that A.M. remove the religious message in her speech. She refused and the principal contacted the superintendent who also believed A.M. should not be permitted to speak at the ceremony unless she removed the religious sentence from her speech. She complied and delivered the speech without the religious content. In January 2010, the student filed