Pros And Cons Of The First Amendment
Francis Mejia
Period 4
Many parts of the United States Constitution can be interpreted in different ways. This makes it difficult to make decisions on cases because of the many possible ways to look at what is constitutional and what is not. In every court decision, The Supreme Court must carefully analyze and interpret the amendments to the Constitution and apply them. The first Amendment states that “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.” One controversial case involving the rules of the First Amendment was Snyder v. Phelps in 2010. The Supreme Court says it is acceptable according to the Constitution for people to protest at military funerals. However, this should not be considered constitutional because it violates the rights of the family of the deceased.
In the case of Snyder v. Phelps, the first Amendment had been brought to the attention of the court and how it may have been violated in a past case which awarded the Snyder family five-million dollars in damages …show more content…
The matter up for interpretation was whether or not the signs and comments from the Westboro Baptist Church were speaking on “matters of public concern.” They analyzed the content, form, and context of the speech to decide if it related to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community. The Supreme Court said that, because the picketers were on public land, adjacent to a public street, and the overall theme of their speech was related to broader public issues, Phelps and the other picketers were speaking on matters of public concern and were entitled to protection from the First Amendment. This was decided in an 8-1
Period 4
Many parts of the United States Constitution can be interpreted in different ways. This makes it difficult to make decisions on cases because of the many possible ways to look at what is constitutional and what is not. In every court decision, The Supreme Court must carefully analyze and interpret the amendments to the Constitution and apply them. The first Amendment states that “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.” One controversial case involving the rules of the First Amendment was Snyder v. Phelps in 2010. The Supreme Court says it is acceptable according to the Constitution for people to protest at military funerals. However, this should not be considered constitutional because it violates the rights of the family of the deceased.
In the case of Snyder v. Phelps, the first Amendment had been brought to the attention of the court and how it may have been violated in a past case which awarded the Snyder family five-million dollars in damages …show more content…
The matter up for interpretation was whether or not the signs and comments from the Westboro Baptist Church were speaking on “matters of public concern.” They analyzed the content, form, and context of the speech to decide if it related to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community. The Supreme Court said that, because the picketers were on public land, adjacent to a public street, and the overall theme of their speech was related to broader public issues, Phelps and the other picketers were speaking on matters of public concern and were entitled to protection from the First Amendment. This was decided in an 8-1