-
Evans vs. Selma Union High School District of Fresno County
The Selma Union High School said that they would not allow King James version of the Bible into their library because the school thought that by accepting the book into their library, they would be accepting the books beliefs. However, the Californian Supreme Court said that by adding a book of sorts to there library does not mean such things, but only expands there library and nothing else. Not letting the boy, Evan, have/read the book in the school, violates his rights to the First Amendment. -
Stanley vs. Georgia
A man was convicted of with holding private materials that were in violation of Georgia's State Laws. However, the Supreme Court overturned his convictions because this went against the First Amendment rights for the right to privacy and anonymity. Regardless of a person's social statues, and their general worth, the Constitution does not prevent people from controlling person's private thoughts. The man won and his convictions were forgotten. -
New York Times Company vs. United States
The U.S. government attempted to encourage the New York Times and the Washington Post from publishing classified documents regarding the Vietnam War, in the "Pentagon Papers" case. The Supreme Court discovered that the publication of the deed would interfere with foreign policies and would prolong the war, were too theoretical, and were dangerous topics to publish. Although there is the Freedom Speech, the topic went against people's safety. -
Zykan vs. Warsaw (Indiana) Community School Corporation and Warsaw School Board of Trustees
In 1980, the Warsaw Indiana Community School Corporation immediately turned a student, Zykan, down when he asked to remove some books from the library, and change some courses to the curriculum. The Court, however, said that the school was violating Zykan's First Amendment rights by not letting him talk to the board before getting turned down; he has the right to talk to a higher threshold before defeat. -
Mozert vs. Hawkins County Board of Education
Parents and students brought up the action that certain use of textbooks in school, promoted values offense to their religious beliefs. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected these accusations because the Constitution does not require the school curriculum to just accommodate religious beliefs. -
Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier
The principal of Hazelwood School District, Kuhlmeier, took out some pages from the school newspaper containing articles about teenage pregnancy and the impact of divorce on children, to protect pregnant or expecting students and to prevent inappropriate references to sexual activity. Student staff complained that this violated their First Amendment rights, however, the Supreme Court said that in this case, Kuhlmeier was protecting the students from these references in school. -
Romano vs. Harrington
The Supreme Court found a favor of an employee to a high school newspaper. They claimed there was a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments when the newspaper's publication of a student's article opposed the federal holiday of Martin Luther King, Jr. The Court said the teachers may provide greater editorial control over what students write for class, than what they voluntarily submit to external publications. So the faculty lost. -
Cohen vs. San Bernardino Valley College
A professor of San Bernardino Valley College, Cohen, got into trouble with the school complaining that his teaching style was too violent, using lots of profanity, covering "inappropriate" topics such as sex, pornography, obscenity, cannibalism, and many more hot topics. However, the Supreme Court said this did not affect any First Amendment rights of sexual harassment, and that Cohen has been using this same style of teaching for years. Cohen is confused on why this is such an issue now. -
American Library Association vs. U.S. Department of Justice and Reno vs. American Civil Liberties Union
The Supreme Court declared the law of prohibiting unusual and inappropriate content on the internet to be shared and available to minor,s unconstitutional. The internet is considered the right to Freedom of Speech, so prohibiting this would go against the First Amendment rights. -
Interactive Digital Software Association vs. St. Louis County, Missouri
St. Louis County had passed an ordinance banning the sales or renting of violent video games to minors, and permitting minors from playing them without parental consent, but video game dealers fought this law. The Supreme Court said that this ordinance cannot fall within the legal definition of obscenity, this does not question the First Amendment, and that the selling of video games of such sorts can't be forbidden; its the parents choice, they should be regulating their children, not the law.
