Civil Liberties

Parks and Demonstrations

The Bill of Rights (12/15/1791)Originally 12 amendments and ten pass.Passed Later?

Varying compensation for congress (1992).

What didn’t?Number of reps per state.

The Bill of Rights – Originally National Only

In Barron v. Baltimore (1833), the Court held that the Bill of Rights did not apply to state laws. With the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the Court began to apply the Bill of Rights to the states. Section I of the Fourteenth Amendment reads “No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.”

14th Amendment

The Bill of Rights – 14th Amendment

With the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the Court began to apply the Bill of Rights to the states. Section I of the Fourteenth Amendment reads “No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” 14th Amendment

The Bill of Rights – 14th Amendment

“No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” 14th Amendment - 2

The Bill of Rights

Gitlow v. New York (1925) the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment protected the freedom of speech Incorporation Theory—the view that most of the protections of the Bill of Rights apply to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause.

The Bill of Rights – 14th Amendment

“No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” 14th Amendment - 3

Freedom of Religion

Establishment Clause—the part of the First Amendment prohibiting the establishment of a church officially supported by the national government. It is applied to questions of the legality of giving state and local government aid to religious organizations and schools, allowing or requiring school prayers, and teaching evolution versus intelligent design.

Freedom of Religion

Free Exercise Clause—the provision of the first Amendment guaranteeing the free exercise of religion. The provision constrains the national government from prohibiting individuals from practicing the religion of their choice.

Religion and the Presidency

Freedom of Religion?

School VouchersOriginated in Ohio and currently ten states allow public funds to be used for private education.Bush supportedObama Opposes

Freedom of ReligionEngel v. Vitale (1962)—The State Board of Regents were challenged on the generic prayer spoken aloud in pubic schools. Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) outlawed the Lord’s prayer. States have interpreted moment of silence in public schools as long as the purpose is secular.

AP Photo/The Lufkin Daily News, Joel Andrews

Freedom of ReligionEpperson v. Arkansas (1968), the Supreme Court held that the Arkansas law prohibiting the teaching of evolution violated the establishment clause, imposing religious beliefs on students. To avoid lawsuits, school districts employ ambiguous language, focusing on the strengths and weaknesses when discussing evolution.

Freedom of Religion

Both born in NJ to first generation immigrantsBoth Roman CatholicBoth graduated from HarvardBoth appointed by Republican PresidentsEasy Senate Confirmations

William J. Brennan

AntoninScalia

Freedom of Religion “The genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning in may have had in a world that is dead and gone,” he wrote in a 1997 essay, “but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and present needs.” He saw the animating spirit of the Constitution as the protection of the dignity of the individual against the power of majoritarian government. At the Supreme Court, Brennan cheerfully and tirelessly lobbied fellow justices for the extra votes needed to win a victory for free speech, defendant’s rights, or a broader vision of equal rights.

William J. Brennan

Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html

Freedom of ReligionInsists that the Constitution’s meaning was determined by the “original intent” of its drafters and ratifiers— a “frozen” and limiting document. He so aggressively promotes his conservative views on issues before the Court that he oftentimes alienates the very justices whose votes might have tipped a case in his favored direction. Steven Shapiro, national legal director of the ACLU, observed, “I think he is one justice who thinks his influence is not putting together majorities today but influencing history tomorrow.” In oral arguments, the combative Scalia frequently asked more questions than the other eight justices put together.

Antonin Scalia

Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html

Freedom of Religion The Court announced its decision in Edwards v Aguillard on June 19, 1987. Writing for the Court, Justice Brennan said the state failed to identify a “clear secular purpose” for the Act, as required by the Constitution. Brennan concluded that Louisiana’s stated goal of protecting “academic freedom” was a sham. The real goal, as he saw it, “was to narrow the science curriculum.” Justice Scalia, in a typically colorful dissent joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, accused Brennan and the majority of deciding constitutional issues “on the gallop” and “impugning the motives” of the law’s supporters.

William J. Brennan

Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html

Freedom of ReligionAs far as the Constitution is concerned, Scalia insisted, all that matters is that legislators sincerely believed that creation science was scientific. It is not necessary, for constitutional purposes, that their collective assessment was right. If a legislature full of ignoramuses requires geography teachers to teach that the earth is flat, it is a sorry state of affairs—but not an unconstitutional one. Moreover, the fact that many supporters of the law might also have had religious motivations is of no concern. Scalia noted that the Court would never “strike down a law providing money to feed the hungry or shelter the homeless” just because legislators might have had religious beliefs that influenced their decision.

Antonin Scalia

Source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/brennanscalia.html

Freedom of ReligionIn Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (2009), the Supreme Court ruled that by accepting monuments, the City of Pleasant Gove was exercising its own freedom of speech, rather than regulating the speech of others.

AP Photo/Al Behrman

Freedom of Religion

The Free Exercise Clause

Individuals may hold any religious beliefs and practices, but if it works against public policy and public welfare, the government can act.

Freedom of Religion

Churches and other religious organizations are tax exempt and cannot endorse candidates or make political contributionsThey are allowed to take ballot positions.

California Proposition 8 opposition paid for by Mormons and Roman Catholics.

Freedom of Speech Amendment I

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.

Freedom of Speech?

Symbolic SpeechCommercial SpeechPermitted restrictions on free speechObscenityHate speech

Supreme Court

1st Amendment – Jon Stewart

Freedom of Speech – Prior RestraintIn the New York Times v. United States (1971), the Court ruled that the Pentagon Papers had the right to be published and that the government carries the burden of showing justification for the enforcement of such a restraint.

Freedom of Speech - Symbolic

Symbolic Speech—Expressions made through articles of clothing, gestures, movements, and other forms of nonverbal conduct are free speech. Established in Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969).The government can ban forms, but must prove intimidation, and cannot infer it from the action

John Tinker, 15, & Christopher Eckhardt, 16

Freedom of Speech - Commercial

Advertising has increasingly been given 1st Amendment protection. Restriction is valid as long as it

Seeks to implement a substantial government interestdirectly advances that interest, and goes no further than necessary to accomplish its objective.

Freedom of Speech - Slander

SlanderThe public uttering of a false statement that harms the good reputation of another. The statement must be made to, or within the hearing of, persons other than the defamed party.

Freedom of Speech - Students

Student SpeechRights of Public School StudentsCollege Student Activity FeesCampus Speech and Behavior Codes

AP Photo/The Arizona Daily Wildcat,Roxana Vasquez

Freedom of the Press

Freedom of the Press

Freedom of Press - Libel

Defamation in writingLibel—a written defamation of a person’s character, reputation, business or property rights. New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), the Supreme Court held when a statement against a public official was made with actual malice, damages could be obtained.

Freedom of Press vs. Fair Trial

Gag OrdersCourts have upheld gag orders when necessary to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trail.

Freedom of Press – Other Media

Movies – self regulating.FCC (1934) created to regulate the electronic airwaves

Right to Privacy – NOT in Constitution

In the 1960’s the Court interpreted the right to privacy in the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 9th amendments.1973 Roe v. Wade was considered a privacy issue for women.

Right to Privacy

Privacy Act of 1974.The first comprehensive legislation regulating the use of federal government information and private citizens.

Right to Privacy – Ongoing Issues

80’s-90’s more conservative court.

Abortion regulations vary by state.Clinic violence buffer zonesLimiting abortion rights.

Right to Privacy – Ongoing Issues

The right to dieRoving wiretapsWarrantsPatriot Act

Civil Liberties vs. Society

The rights of the accused (4th, 5th, 6th and 8th amendments).Miranda v. ArizonaThe death penalty

Civil Liberties vs. Society