Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
27 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Freedom of expression covers three civil liberties (3) |
Speech, Press, and Assembly |
|
|
Why is free speech important? (4) |
Self-governance, Truth, Autonomy, Tolerance |
|
|
What is the hierarchy of speech? |
Political speech is protected, there is a middle/gray area, and a non-protected area of libel/slander |
|
|
Schenck v. United States; Does the espionage act violate Schenck's right to speech? |
No. Court establishes Clear & Present Danger test |
|
|
Clear and Present Danger (3 prongs) |
Did the act intend criminal consequence?
Did the act present a clear & present danger?
Was the criminal objective a grave evil? |
|
|
In Debs V. United States does the court rule that free speech is not absolute? |
Yes. |
|
|
Gitlow v. New York |
Gitlow is convicted for anarchy speech; court rules government can regulate speech that can imperil its own existence. |
|
|
Why is Gitlow important (3) |
Free speech still not absolute
It incorporates the first amendment
Court establishes bad tendency test |
|
|
US v. Carolene Products |
Establishes preferred freedoms doctrine |
|
|
Preferred freedoms doctrine (3 rights) |
Rights crucial to political process
Rights that deal with minorities
Specific rights mentioned in the Bill of Rights |
|
|
Thomas v. Collins |
Court explicitly states that speech is a preferred freedom |
|
|
Dennis v. United States (2) |
Court establishes Congress' authority to protect national gov.
Court establishes clear and probable danger test |
|
|
Clear and probable danger |
Focuses on the gravity of the evil and the probability of its execution |
|
|
Brandenburg v. Ohio |
law fails to distinguish between teaching and advocating doctrine; teaching v. advocating violence |
|
|
Brandenburg requirements for limiting speech (3) |
Proof of imminent harm
A likelihood of producing illegal action
Intent to cause imminent illegality
|
|
|
What is symbolic speech? |
Speech in the form of symbols, i.e. armbands, flags, etc. |
|
|
Stromberg v. California |
Court extends 1st amendment protection to symbolic speech |
|
|
WV State board of education v. Barnette |
Court reinforces that symbolic speech is protected under free speech |
|
|
United States v. O'Brien |
Creates the O'Brien test, burning of a draft card |
|
|
O'Brien Test (4) |
Is the regulation within the constitutional power of the government?
Does the regulation further government interest?
Is the regulation unrelated to suppression of free expression?
Is the regulation the least restrictive means? |
|
|
Tinker v. Des Moines |
Black armbands as protest is synonymous with free speech |
|
|
Texas v. Johnson |
Burning flag is protected under free speech, preserving flag as symbol of national unity is not compelling interest |
|
|
Fighting words |
words intended to provoke violence |
|
|
Chaplinksy v. New Hampshire |
Law only prohibits offensive speech, Chaplinksy was being offensive |
|
|
Cohen v. California (2) |
Cohen's words did not fall into category of offensive
Court generally protects indecent speech (i.e. a message communicated in an offensive way) |
|
|
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation |
regulating indecent speech over television and radio is permissible |
|
|
R.A.V. v. Minnesota |
cannot prohibit speech based on subject of content |
