-
Schenck Vs. United States
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes stated in his case if "fire" could be yelled in a movie theater. He wondered if this statement was covered by the first amendment. The supreme court ruled that it was not covered by the first amendment because it causes confusion and danger to everyone and causes them to go crazy. -
Bethel School District Vs. Fraser
Matthew Fraser was a high school student who gave a speech to nominate another student for a student government office. He was suspended for giving that speech at a school assembly that included inappropriate content. The speech included repeated use of an elaborate, graphic, and explicit sexual metaphor, in reference to another student nominated to do the speech. The 1st Amendment does not prevent a school district from disciplining a student for using speech that is inappropriate. -
Ginsberg v. New York
The Supreme Court tried a New York State statute barring retailers from selling sexually explicit publications to minors under the age of 17. it found that it was not constitutional for New York to restrict minors rights to such publications in light of the state's interest in protecting children's welfare and supporting parents' claim to authority in the rearing of their children. -
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
John F. Tinker, Christopher Eckhardt, and Mary Beth Tinker got expelled from school for wearing black arm bands to school to symbolize the protest of the Vietnam war. The supreme court ruled that the First Amendment protects public school students rights to express political and social views so the school does not have the right to shed their constitutional rights. -
New York Times Company Vs. United States
The government attempted to come at the Washington post and the New York Times for publishing classified documents concerning the Vietnam war. The Court found that the claims that publication of the documents would interfere with foreign policy and could not overcome the strong presumption against prior restraints. -
New York v. Ferber
In July 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court added child pornography as another category of speech excluded from First Amendment protection. The ruling came in when the U.S. Supreme Court had a conviction against Ferber for showing a movie depicting two young boys masturbating. The film itself was not seen as obscene for adults, but the Court made the distinction between what was appropriate if children were the participants compared with if adults were the leading actors. -
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
A public school principal removed two articles from the school newspaper due to content he considered inappropriate. One story was about teen pregnancy, and the other was about divorce.The school district did not violate the rights of students. Public schools can look over, with some limitations, the content of student newspapers and other publications that are paid for by the school. -
Texas Vs. Johnson
Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag because of protest against Reagan administration policies. Johnson was tried and convicted under a Texas law outlawing flag desecration. He was sentenced to one year in jail and assessed a $2,000 fine. -
R.A.V. v. St. Paul
In St. Paul, Minnesota they passed an ordinance that banned "hate speech", such as a burning cross or swastika, that might arouse anger, alarm, or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, religion, or gender. The Supreme Court ruled the ordinance down as unconstitutionally based on the content of expression the law banned only fighting words that insult based on race, religion, or gender. -
Morse Vs. Fredrick
In 2002, the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska on the way to the winter games in Salt Lake City, Utah.Students attended with their teachers as a school-sponsored event. As the runners went past the school Joseph Frederick, with the help of others, held up a banner that “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” Schools can regulate speech that conflicts with school anti-drug policies even if the speech doesn’t directly disrupt the educational process.
