Term 1: Constitutional Law and First Amendment Rights, Quizzes of Political Science

Download Term 1: Constitutional Law and First Amendment Rights and more Quizzes Political Science in PDF only on Docsity! TERM 1 Rust v. Sullivan 1991 DEFINITION 1 Government money given to family planning can't be used to fund abortion or abortion related activities (including talking about it)Does gag rule violate first?SC: NO, just because government money can't be used to fund or talk about abortion doesn't prevent talking about abortion TERM 2 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act DEFINITION 2 The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 is a United States federal law that amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which regulates the financing of political campaigns. TERM 3 Constitutional tests DEFINITION 3 Facially uncontitutional: law is unconst on its face and can't be applied in any casemore broadas applied: an other wise const law TERM 4 Citizens United v. FEC 2010 DEFINITION 4 Court argued that they couldn't resolve the case in a more narrow fashionIf they did so it would "chill" political speech therefore they had to reconsider the constitutional questionsSC:1st amend is based on mistrust of gov, gov can't disfavour subjects or viewpoints or use law to favour certain speakers.gov can't use crime law to ban political speech by certain speakers TERM 5 Establishment DEFINITION 5 A state religion (also called an official religion, established church or state church) is a religious body or creed officially endorsed by the state. TERM 6 First Amendment DEFINITION 6 Prohibits the making of any law1.respecting an establishment of religion,impeding thefree exercise of religion2. abridging thefreedom of speech, infringing on thefreedom of the press,3. interfering with theright to peaceably assembleor prohibiting thepetitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. TERM 7 Conflicting Interpretations DEFINITION 7 1. Strict Separation2. Strict Neutrality3. Non Preferentialist TERM 8 Non Preferentialist DEFINITION 8 State promotes religion but not any single one TERM 9 Strict Neutrality DEFINITION 9 dissent in everson Religion should compete with irreligion TERM 10 Strict Separation DEFINITION 10 - may permit indirect support- majority in everson TERM 21 Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) DEFINITION 21 Amish parents prosecuted under wisconsin law requiring attendancein school until age 16Wisco upholds the lawSC: against state, education is important but balance is neededamish claims: must be religious beliefs generating claims-secondary schooling would be detrimental to children during an important developmental stage.Severe & inescapable danger, interposes a serious barrier into the amish community TERM 22 Barron v. Baltimore (1833) DEFINITION 22 Baltimore charged with violation 5th amendCan BoR Be applied to state/municipalSC: No, there is no mention of applying to states TERM 23 West Virginia v. Barnette (1943) DEFINITION 23 WV BoE law persecuted children & fams for not saluting the flagis this violation of freedom of speech?SC: Yes, actions can be a form of speech state can't force speech TERM 24 Schenck v. United States (1951) DEFINITION 24 Schenck Prosecuted for violating espionage act printed, leaflets opposing draftDid act violate 1st amendmentSC: No, 1st amendment didn't protect agains in subordination, war time = greater restrictionsEstablished clear and present danger test TERM 25 Gitlow v. New York (1925) DEFINITION 25 Gitlow convicted for distributing com manifesto, charged with plotting to overthrow us govdid conviction under ny law violate 1stSC: no speech may be regulated if incites crimeBoR extends to lower govs TERM 26 Dennis v. United States (1951) DEFINITION 26 Dennis (Com party secretary) Convicted with conspiracy to over throw Gov (violated smith act)Did smith act violate 1st? SC: No, Plans to teaching and advocating the overthrow of US gov is a "clear and present danger" TERM 27 Cohen v California (1971) DEFINITION 27 Cohen prosecuted for wearing jacket that says "f-the draft"Did conviction Violate 1stSC: yes, states only reason was to inhibit communication, defendants message showed no interest inciting disobeying the draft, not directed at any one person.Emotive speech used to get attentionfirst case to classify and protect emotive speech TERM 28 Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica (1978) DEFINITION 28 FCC may regulate radio broadcasts that are indecentDoes FCCs regulation violate 1st?SC: No, no rule that 1st prohibits all govt regulation, words used were offensive argument to just turn off radio indecent, radio uniquely accessible to children govt has responsibility to protect children.Any broadcast with patently offensive words may be regulated by the gov TERM 29 Morse v. Frederick (2007) DEFINITION 29 student suspended for writing "bong hits for jesus at school event"first amendment case can schools restrict speech at a school sanctioned event or on school property?SC: yes, suspension was warranted speech advocated for illegal drug use. schools may restrict speech bc they have a compelling interest in students welfare TERM 30 RAV c. St. Paul (1992) DEFINITION 30 RAV prosecuted for breaking city of st paul ordinance -> burning a cross on an african americans lawn.Did this infringe on 1st amend?SC: yes, ordinance prohibits protected speech solely on the basis of subjects of which the speech addresses. TERM 31 Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993) DEFINITION 31 Mitchell charged with battery, punishment increased bc it was race related battery.Did increase of his sentence due to bigotry violate fist amendment?SC: No, wisconsin laws fell inline with anti discrimination laws, not punishing for beliefs or ideas rather punishing for actions