Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AP Government Project Civil Liberties
AP Government Project Civil Liberties
Freedom of Speech
Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. School District (1969) Miller v. California (1973) ethel School District !o. "#3 v. $raser (19%6) Matthe& $raser tho'(ht it &as a (reat) f'nn* idea. 't once he 'sed a (ra+hic se,'al meta+hor in his s+eech to nominate his friend for an elective office in front of 6## hi(h school st'dents) he reali-ed his school fo'nd it offensive. efore (ivin( the s+eech) he let several teachers read it) and t&o advised a(ainst it. .fter the s+eech) the .ssistant /rinci+al informed him that he violated a school r'le. $raser admitted deli0eratel* 'sin( se,'al inn'endos and &as then s's+ended from school for t&o da*s. The 1'estion de0ated &as &hether or not the $irst .mendment avoids a school district from +'nishin( a hi(h school st'dent for +resentin( 2le&d3 s+eech. The ethel School District claimed that $raser violated their 2disr'+tive cond'ct r'le)3 &hich +rohi0its o0scene lan('a(e and (est'res. $raser) on the other hand) claims his $irst .mendment ri(hts &ere violated) es+eciall* since he claims the r'le itself &as 'nconstit'tionall* va('e and 2over0road.3 The ma4orit* of the S'+reme Co'rt sided &ith the ethel School District) statin( that altho'(h the $irst .mendment does not +rohi0it offensive s+eech for ad'lts) it does not +rotect children in +'0lic school. The Co'rt also held that the school5s r'le is not over0road) es+eciall* (iven the &ide ran(e of scenarios a school faces. 6a-el&ood School District v. 7'hlmeier (19%%) .s accordin( to +ractice) the teacher advisor of 6a-el&ood 8ast 6i(h School5s ne&s+a+er (ave the +rinci+al the +roofs of the ne&s+a+er for a++roval. The +rinci+al &as &orried a0o't the res+onses stories on +re(nanc* and divorce &o'ld receive. Decidin( it &as too late to chan(e the stories) the +rinci+al said the +a(es) &hich incl'ded the stories) sho'ld not 0e +'0lished at all. So staff mem0ers s'ed. The 1'estion de0ated on &as &hether or not the +rinci+al5s decision to (et rid of the +a(es violated the st'dents5 $irst .mendment ri(hts. 7'hlmeier and her fello& mem0ers ar('ed that the school5s ne&s+a+er is a for'm for +eo+le to e,+ress their vie&s. The school district ar('ed that 0eca'se the ne&s+a+er and 4o'rnalism are a +art of the c'rric'l'm) the +rinci+al does has the ri(ht to re('late &hat (ets +'0lished. The S'+reme Co'rt decided in a 9 to 3 vote that the +rinci+al5s decision did not violate the st'dents5 $irst .mendment ri(hts. It a(reed &ith the
6a-el&ood School District) claimin( that the administration can re('late the school ne&s+a+er) as the +rinci+al has an interest in the st'dents5 ed'cation. The Co'rt also stated that a school ne&s+a+er is not a +'0lic for'm. :nited States v. ;5 rien (196%) David ;5 rien &as convicted after he 0'rned his draft card at a oston co'rtho'se. ;5 rien said that he &as e,+ressin( his disa++roval of the &ar. :nder federal la&) ho&ever) the m'tilation and<or destr'ction of draft cards are a crime. ;5 rien ar('ed that the la& &as 'nconstit'tional 0eca'se it &as enacted to infrin(e '+on free s+eech and it served no other +'r+ose. The S'+reme Co'rt re4ected ;5 rien5s ar('ment. Sa*in( that 2. (overnmental re('lation is s'fficientl* 4'stified if it is &ithin the constit'tional +o&er of the =overnment and f'rthers >+36%? an im+ortant or s'0stantial (overnmental interest 'nrelated to the s'++ression of free e,+ression) and if the incidental restriction on alle(ed $irst .mendment freedom is no (reater than is essential to that interest. The 1969 .mendment meets all these re1'irements.3 The Co'rt then created a test determinin( &hen (overnmental re('lation &as 4'stified in freedom of e,+ression cases involvin( s*m0olic s+eech. The test re1'ired that the (overnment interest to 0e 2valid and im+ortant3 and one 'nrelated to the s'++ression of free s+eech in order to 0e constit'tional. This case is no& 'sed not onl* in reference to s*m0olic s+eech 0't also &ith cases concernin( time) +lace and manner of restrictions. Te,as v. @ohnson (19%9) In 19%") =re(or* Aee @ohnson 0'rned an .merican fla( in front of the Dallas Cit* 6all to +rotest a(ainst Bea(an5s +olicies. @ohnson &as convicted 'nder the Te,as la& that o'tla&ed fla( desecration. 6e &as sentenced to one *ear in 4ail and (iven a CD)### fine. Citi-ens :nited v. $ederal 8lection Commission (D#1#) Citi-ens :nited so'(ht an in4'nction a(ainst the $ederal 8lection Commission in the :nited States District Co'rt for the District of Col'm0ia to +revent the a++lication of the i+artisan Cam+ai(n Beform .ct to its film 6illar*E The Movie. The movie e,+ressed o+inions a0o't &hether Senator 6illar* Bodham Clinton &o'ld make a (ood +resident. In an attem+t to re('late F0i( mone*F cam+ai(n contri0'tions) the CB. a++lied a variet* of restrictions to Felectioneerin( comm'nications.F Section D#3 of the CB. +revents cor+orations or la0or 'nions from f'ndin( s'ch comm'nication from their (eneral treas'ries. Sections D#1 and 311 re1'ire the disclos're of donors to s'ch comm'nication and a disclaimer &hen the comm'nication is not a'thori-ed 0* the candidate it intends to s'++ort. Citi-ens :nited ar('ed thatE 1) Section D#3 violates the $irst .mendment on its face and &hen a++lied to the movie and its related advertisements) and that D) Sections D#1 and D#3 are also 'nconstit'tional as a++lied to the circ'mstances. The :nited States District Co'rt denied the in4'nction. Section D#3 on its
face &as not 'nconstit'tional 0eca'se the S'+reme Co'rt in McConnell v. $ederal 8lection Commission had alread* reached that determination. The District Co'rt also held that the movie &as the f'nctional e1'ivalent of e,+ress advocac*) as it attem+ted to inform voters that Senator Clinton &as 'nfit for office) and th's Section D#3 &as not 'nconstit'tionall* a++lied. Aastl*) it held that Sections D#1 and D#3 &ere not 'nconstit'tional as a++lied to the movie or its advertisements. The co'rt reasoned that the McConnell decision reco(ni-ed that disclos're of donors Fmi(ht 0e 'nconstit'tional if it im+osed an 'nconstit'tional 0'rden on the freedom to associate in s'++ort of a +artic'lar ca'se)F 0't those circ'mstances did not e,ist in Citi-en :nitedGs claim. The ma4orit* o+inion) delivered 0* @'stice 7enned*) fo'nd that D :.S.C. H ""1(0)Gs +rohi0ition of all inde+endent e,+endit'res 0* cor+orations and 'nions &as invalid and co'ld not 0e a++lied to s+endin( s'ch as that in 6illar*E The Movie. 7enned* &roteE FIf the $irst .mendment has an* force) it +rohi0its Con(ress from finin( or 4ailin( citi-ens) or associations of citi-ens) for sim+l* en(a(in( in +olitical s+eech.F 6e also noted that since there &as no &a* to distin('ish 0et&een media and other cor+orations) these restrictions &o'ld allo& Con(ress to s'++ress +olitical s+eech in ne&s+a+ers) 0ooks) television and 0lo(s. The Co'rt overr'led .'stin v. Michi(an Cham0er of Commerce) &hich had +revio'sl* held that a Michi(an cam+ai(n finance act that +rohi0ited cor+orations from 'sin( treas'r* mone* to s'++ort or o++ose candidates in elections did not violate the $irst and $o'rteenth .mendments. The Co'rt also overr'led the +art of McConnell v. $ederal 8lection Commission that '+held CB. HD#3Gs e,tension of H""10Gs restrictions on inde+endent cor+orate e,+endit'res.The Co'rt fo'nd that CB. HHD#1 and 311I +rovisions re1'irin( disclos're of the f'nderI &ere valid as a++lied to the ads for 6illar* and to the movie itself. The !e& Jork Times re+orted that D" states &ith la&s +rohi0itin( inde+endent e,+endit'res 0* 'nions and cor+orations &ill have to chan(e their cam+ai(n finance la&s 0eca'se of the r'lin(. Senator Dick D'r0in +ro+osed that candidates &ho si(n '+ small donors receive C9##)### in +'0lic mone*. ;thers have +ro+osed that la&s on cor+orate (overnance 0e amended to ass're that shareholders vote on +olitical e,+endit'res. In $e0r'ar* D#1#) Senator Charles 8. Sch'mer of !e& Jork) immediate +ast Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Cam+ai(n Committee) and Be+resentative Chris Kan 6ollen of Mar*land) Chairman of the Democratic Con(ressional Cam+ai(n Committee) o'tlined le(islation aimed at 'ndoin( the decision. In .+ril D#1#) the* introd'ced s'ch le(islation in the Senate and 6o'se) res+ectivel*. ;n @'ne D") D#1#) 6.B.9179 (The DISCA;S8 .ct) +assed in the 6o'se of Be+resentatives to re1'ire additional disclos're 0* cor+orations of their cam+ai(n e,+endit'res. The la&) if +assed) &o'ld also +rohi0it some +olitical s+endin( 0* :.S. com+anies &ith t&ent* +ercent or more forei(n o&nershi+) and some (overnment contractors. The DISCA;S8 .ct incl'des e,em+tions to its r'les (iven to certain s+ecial interests s'ch as the !ational Bifle .ssociation and the .merican .ssociation of Betired /ersons. These (a+s &ithin the +ro+osal have attracted criticism from la&makers on 0oth +olitical +arties. FThe* are a'ctionin( off +ieces of the $irst
.mendment in this 0ill... The 0i((er *o' are) the stron(er *o' are) the less disclos're *o' have)F said Be+'0lican Con(ressman Dan A'n(ren of California. Demoratic Con(ressman .dam Schiff of California commented) FI &ish there had 0een no carveIo'tsF. The DISCA;S8 .ct t&ice failed to +ass the :.S. Senate in the 111th Con(ress) 0oth times reachin( 99 of the 6# votes re1'ired to overcome a 'nified Be+'0lican fili0'ster. Morse v. $rederick (D##7) .t a schoolIs'+ervised event) @ose+h $rederick held '+ a 0anner &ith the messa(e 2 on( hits " @es's3. /rinci+al De0orah Morse took the 0anner a&a* and s's+ended $rederick for 1# da*s. She 4'stified her actions 0* citin( the school5s +olic* a(ainst the dis+la* of an* material +romotin( ille(al dr'( 'se. $rederick s'ed 'nder "D :.S.C. 19%3) the federal civil ri(hts stat'te) alle(in( a violation of his $irst .mendment ri(ht to freedom of s+eech. The District Co'rt fo'nd no constit'tional violation and r'led in favor of Morse. The co'rt held that even if there &ere a violation) the +rinci+al had 1'alified for imm'nit* from la&s'it. The :.S. Co'rt of .++eals for the !inth Circ'it reversed) citin( Tinker v. Des Moines Inde+endent Comm'nit* School District) &hich e,tended $irst .mendment +rotection to st'dent s+eech e,ce+t &here the s+eech &o'ld ca'se a dist'r0ance. eca'se $rederick &as +'nished for his messa(e rather than for an* dist'r0ance) the circ'it Co'rt r'led) the +'nishment &as 'nconstit'tional. .lso) the +rinci+al had no 1'alified imm'nit*) 0eca'se an* reasona0le +rinci+al &o'ld have kno&n that Morse5s actions &ere 'nla&f'l. Chief @'stice Bo0erts) &ritin( for the ma4orit*) concl'ded that the school officials did not violate the $irst .mendment 0* confiscatin( the +roIdr'( 0anner and s's+endin( the st'dent res+onsi0le for it. .fter recitin( the 0ack(ro'nd in /art one of the o+inion) in /art t&o he determined that Fschool s+eechF doctrine sho'ld a++l* 0eca'se $rederickGs s+eech occ'rred Fat a school eventFL /art three determined that the s+eech &as Freasona0l* vie&ed as +romotin( ille(al dr'( 'seFL and /art fo'r) in1'ired &hether a +rinci+al ma* le(all* restrict that s+eech) concl'din( that she co'ldM'nder the three e,istin( $irst .mendment school s+eech +recedents) other Constit'tional 4'ris+r'dence relatin( to schools) and a schoolGs Fim+ortantMindeed) +erha+s com+ellin( interestF in deterrin( dr'( 'se 0* st'dents. The .merican Civil Ai0erties :nion directl* +artici+ated in this case on the side of @ose+h $rederick. The Center for Individ'al Bi(hts) !ational Coalition .(ainst Censorshi+) and other (ro'+s that advocate $irst .mendment +rotection filed amici c'riae in s'++ort of $rederick. St'dents for Sensi0le Dr'( /olic* also noted that 0annin( dr'(Irelated s+eech &o'ld 'ndermine their a0ilit* to have cha+ters in +'0lic schools. The .merican Center for Aa& and @'stice) and B'therford Instit'te) and several other Christian ri(ht (ro'+s also filed 0riefs on the side of $rederick) reasonin( that if schools co'ld 0an FoffensiveF s+eech the* &o'ld also 0e a0le to +rohi0it reli(io's s+eech &ith &hich administrators disa(ree. ;n this +oint) the Christian ri(ht (ro'+s +revailed) as the S'+reme Co'rt e,+licitl* declined to hold that school 0oards co'ld disci+line FoffensiveF s+eech) notin( that Fm'ch +olitical and reli(io's s+eech mi(ht 0e
+erceived as offensive to someF and the concern is Fnot that $rederickGs s+eech &as offensive) 0't that it &as reasona0l* vie&ed as +romotin( ille(al dr'( 'se.F The !ational School oards .ssociation s'++orts Morse and the @'nea' school district) ar('in( that schools sho'ld 0e a0le to re('late controversial s+eech. :.S. Solicitor =eneral /a'l Clement filed an amic's 0rief in s'++ort of the school districtGs decision to +rohi0it controversial s+eech. ;n March 19) D##7) St'dents for Sensi0le Dr'( /olic* or(ani-ed a &idel* +'0lici-ed free s+eech rall* at the S'+reme Co'rt d'rin( oral ar('ments. The Dr'( /olic* .lliance and the !ational Jo'th Bi(hts .ssociation assisted &ith the rall*) &hich 0ro'(ht do-ens of st'dents from across the co'ntr* to the co'rt ste+s.