Constitution against flag

1st Amendment Project Part 1

  • Mayflower Compact

    Mayflower Compact
    The Mayflower Compact was established in order to create a democratic government in the Americas and gave citizens the power to decide their own laws to follow , which is similar to the First Amendment when people have to petition the government and freedom of speech.
  • The Constitution of the United States of America

    The Constitution of the United States of America
    John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington were the founding fathers of the Constitution, which framed our national government.
  • Edwards V.S. South Carolina

    Edwards V.S. South Carolina
    187 African Americans peacefully protested their segregation laws in South Carolina. 30 police officers ordered them to leave or be arrested, although they were causing no harm. The Court later ruled their arrests violated the First Amendment.
  • Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier

    Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
    Cathy Kuhlmeier, Leslie Smart, and Leanne Tippett wrote articles for the school newspaper over "sensitive" topics and the principal refused to publish them. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the girls. The court believed that the school newspaper was for students interested in journalism rather than students voicing their opinions and that this was not a violation of the First Amendment.
  • Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe

    Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe
    The school's student chaplain prayed over the announcement system before each football game. Families sued due to a violation of religious freedom. The case did not violate the Constitution due to the speeches being private and at school rather than pubic.
  • Shaw v. Murphy

    Shaw v. Murphy
    Kevin Murphy sent a letter to an inmate to help him with his defense after assaulting an officer. The letter was taken by the prison because it violated the rules of prison which prohibit interference in hearings. The district court ruled against Murphy, but the Court of Appeals found that the inmate had First Amendment rights to gain legal assistance.
  • Bartnicki v. Vopper

    Bartnicki v. Vopper
    A phone call between the chief union negotiator and the union president was recorded by an unidentified person. Both parties filed suit and the district court found their statutes to be content but the Court of Appeals found their statutes to be invalid.
  • Federal Election Commission v. Beaumont

    Federal Election Commission v. Beaumont
    Direct corporate donations towards federal campaigns were banned .Christine Beaumont and the NCRL believed this was a violation to their freedom of speech. The court ruled in favor of Beaumont and the NCRL.
  • Virginia v. Hicks

    Virginia v. Hicks
    The RRHA created a policy authorizing the police to serve notice on any person running a "non-legitimate" business and arrest anyone who remains on the trespassed land after being notified. Kevin Hicks remained after being notified because he believed the policy was a violation against his First Amendment. The Supreme Court found the policy to be unconstitutional due to the broadness and lacking details.
  • Morse V.S. Frederick

    Morse V.S. Frederick
    Joseph Frederick held up a banner with the message "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at a school sponsored event. The principal suspended Frederick for 10 days due to sponsoring illegal activity.No constitutional violation was found and the court ruled in favor of Morse. The Ninth Circuit extended protection to the students freedom of speech and found no disturbance in his message so his punishment was unconstitutional.
  • Holt v. Hobbs

    Holt v. Hobbs
    Gregory Holt was an inmate practicing Salafi Muslim at the Arkansas Department of Corrections. The department has a grooming policy that allows no facial hair unless for dermatological problems . Holt filed a suit stating this violated his freedom of religion and RLUIPA. The prison compromised for a while until they began to fear prison security. Then the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed.
  • Matal v. Tam

    Matal v. Tam
    A band tried to trademark their name "The Slants" and were denied the application due to racism towards Asians. The appellate court reviewed the case after the Court of Appeals turned them down.The trademark office was wrong about the application and that the clause violated the First Amendment.