The free exercise clause protects the religious beliefs, and to a certain extent, the religious practices of all citizens and the establishment clause prohibits the government from endorsing, supporting, or becoming too involved in religion and religious activities. The state of Wisconsin fined three Amish families for refusing to send their children to school beyond the eighth grade. Wisconsin law stipulated that all children had to attend school until age 16, but the Yoder, Miller, and Yutzy families believed that further education for their children would damage their religious beliefs. The Amish believe in simplicity, and the families considered worldly education harmful to maintaining their way of life. Wisconsin law violated the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. I do agree with the outcome because if your religion state a by law then the state can’t force you to do different. I worked a job that had uniform, but I told them in the interview that I didn’t wear pants. My first day at work I was wrote up for not being in uniform after I bring a letter from my pastor, they had to uphold my religion.
Protected Speech the Supreme Court recognized that the First Amendment’s protections extend to individual and collective speech. Commercial speech proposes a commercial transaction or relates solely to the speaker’s and the audience’s economic interest. Political and Ideological Speech the Supreme Court considered political and ideological speech to be at the core of the First Amendment. Unprotected Speech content-based restrictions on speech laws that “apply to particular speech because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed “are presumptively unconstitutional and subject to strict scrutiny. Obscenity, fighting words, defamation (including libel and slander), child pornography, perjury, blackmail., incitement to imminent lawless action, true threats are all unprotected speech.
Symbolic speech is a nonverbal communication that takes the form of an action in order to communicate a specific belief. Symbolic speech is protected under the First Amendment but may be regulated by the government in some situations. Some forms of symbolic speech are wearing armbands and clothing, silently protesting, flag burning, marching and nudity. Frederick suspended for unveiling banner referencing drug use. The “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not a denial of the First Amendment right to free speech for public school officials to censor student speech that they reasonably believe encourages illegal drug use. The Supreme Court ruled that school officials can prevent students from advocating drug use. Mary Beth Tinker, her brother John, and their friend Christopher Eckhardt decided to stage a peaceful protest of the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to their public schools.
127 our experts are availableright now
School officials announced that students who wore armbands had to remove them or face suspension. The Tinker siblings and Eckhardt refused to remove their armbands, and the district suspended them until their protest ended. The Supreme Court ruled that the armbands were a form of symbolic speech, which is protected by the First Amendment, and therefore the school had violated the students’ First Amendment rights. I feel the Morse case is was ruled right because encouraging drug use and not an Amendment issue and should not have been made an issue at school where there are minor plus drug use is illegal. The Tinker case was a peaceful protest about a legal issue about war. It did not stop a school operation, so the school had no reason to mess with them. Unlike the Morse case the disrupted the school operation by causing a big commotion the case the police to be involved.
Prior restraint is a form of censorship that allows the government to review the content of printed materials and prevent their publication. The First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press includes the restriction of prior restraints. In the Ny Times case, the publisher article was going to put the National Security in danger by giving out sensitive military information. The Supreme Court ruled in New York Times Co. v. United States (1971) that despite the sensitive nature of the information, the newspapers could still publish it under the no prior restraint doctrine. Free of speech overrule the potential harm that could have resulted from publishing the story. Even though one person may feel like you should not say something everyone has the right to say or write as they think. On the other hand you can be sued or even being prosecuted for leaking information.
