The issue with this case is that does it violate the Fourteenth Amendment. Which in short says that no other state has the…
Analysis of the facts involved in this case clearly shows that the passage of this ordinance is indeed unconstitutional. This directly in defiance of the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution.…
HOLDING: Yes, (6-3). The CPPA is unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment, the right to free speech.…
The Supreme Court held that the plan was a race classification and presumed to be unconstitutional unless it was "narrowly tailored" to meet a "compelling government interest."…
My view on this particular case sides with Plessy rather than Ferguson. I believe in total equality and the idea of no difference between fellow human beings. There should be no distinction made between that which is for the white man, and that which is for the black man. Public institutions should be used by everyone together, and the act of riding a train car should not be a racial matter. I also agree that this segregation was a violation of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendment in that it didn't promote the idea of equality among the races that…
Perspective: The implications of this court ruling states that the Congress has limit authority to violate the rights of individuals even when it comes to investigations regarding the welfare of the country. The court ended up ruling a year later, on similar case, Barenblatt v. United States. On this particular case the Supreme Court ruled that the Congress had not violated any rights and thus upheld Barenblatt’s original conviction. The difference between this case, although Barenblatt was not a Communist Activist, he was promoting and discussing theories and studying…
(2) Whether the denial of the permit was a violation of the free speech and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution…
I believe the protestors had every right to gather in silence and try to accept what…
n/a. (2007, June 25). Aclu slams supreme court decision in student free speech case . Retrieved from…
As Walker put it “The American Civil Liberties Union was a unique organization….In contrast, the American Civil Liberties Union adopted the policy of impartially defending civil liberties, including the principle of free speech, without reference to the content of that speech” This comes at a time when “the Supreme Court had soundly rejected all First Amendment claims.” (47)…
The ACLU frequently gets in the news for defending less than reputable characters like KKK members and has defended Neo Nazi’s many times. In 1977, a small group of American Nazis, led by Frank Collin, applied to the town of Skokie, Illinois for permission to hold a demonstration in the town park. Skokie at the time had a majority population of Jews, totalling 40,000 of 70,000 citizens, some of whom were survivors of Nazi concentration camps. Skokie…
The basis of this court case was to determine whether or not wearing armbands in an educational setting is protected under Freedom of Speech. Justice Abe Fortas was against the prohibiting of armbands in school because it was protected by the First Amendment. However, Justice Hugo Black was for the prohibiting of armbands because he did not believe that people could express their opinions or beliefs anywhere or any time.…
Though there may be casualties along the way (such as a great deal on parking in downtown Chicago), ultimately people in America have been guaranteed the right to peacefully assemble to protest that with which they disagree. If the founding fathers had not believed that the ability to peacefully resist is vital to the functioning of a society, they would not have included it in the very first change to the Constitution. If somewhere along the line the judges of the Supreme Court had decided that no, we no longer need this right, or that this right is hurting society, they would have changed the Constitution to reflect that. No, we as Americans are guaranteed these basic rights for a reason. We are living in a free society, and a free society's best tool for expressing its opinion of laws is to peacefully resist…
This is one of the standard arguments that is made, often quite sincerely, against the activities of people like supporters of the Congress of Racial Equality, who set about changing laws they find objectionable by dramatically breaking them. Such groups are often condemned for risking disorder and for spreading disrespect for the law when, so it is maintained, they could accomplish their goals a great deal more fairly and patriotically by staying within the law, and confining themselves to the courts and to methods of peaceful…
Several people take Snyder’s side in the case, : A statement from the Committee for Freedom of the Gregg Leslie Press stated "Most speech will offend somebody and we just need to be able to protect that. We can't have rules that make speech illegal or subject to incredible penalties just because it offends…