The trial between Arkansas Times and the Commissioner of Revenue finally came to a close today after three years.
Arkansas Times is a magazine published in Arkansas that includes articles about many different subjects ranging from religion to sports. The state of Arkansas exempts “religious, professional, trade and sports journals and/or publications printed and published within [the] State…” from paying sales taxes. However, Arkansas Times was not included in the exemption and the magazine felt that their First Amendment rights were infringed upon and felt discriminated against as well.
“If we print in Arkansas and write about sports and even religion then I don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t be exempt from the tax,” Kevin Hanson, an editor for Arkansas Times told us before the final trial decision.
In 1980, the Commissioner of Revenue put a tax on the sales of Arkansas Times, which the magazine immediately
…show more content…
They decided to take their case even further and took it to the United States Supreme Court, hoping to overturn the previous cases that were held at the state level.
“We feel that we have a strong case. Arkansas Times is being discriminated against and the state isn’t treating it the same as they are other magazines and newspapers from Arkansas,” the attorney for Arkansas Times told the press before walking into the final hearing. “It’s a discriminatory tax and violates the first amendment.”
The United States Supreme Court reversed the order from the Arkansas Supreme Court, finding in favor of the magazine. The court felt that the government was discriminating against Arkansas Times based upon their content, which goes against the First Amendment.
“It took longer than we thought but it was all worth it in the long run. The court did the right thing in the end and hopefully our case can help another newspaper or magazine that feels discriminated against,” Hanson told us after hearing the final
Brief of Moore v City of East Cleveland, Ohio 1. Name of Case: MOORE v CITY OF EAST CLEVELAND, OHIO 2. Name of Court: United States Supreme Court; Legal citation: 431 U.S. 494. Set of legal reporters; United States Supreme Court Reporter; Year of decision: 1977.
The decision by the District Judge came just before a contempt of court hearing was to be heard. In the case, Joe Arpaio was accused of ignoring summons given by a Judge. Two prominent newsmen and civil rights activist Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin joined the voices of those disenchanted by the Judge’s
Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell Oral Argument Summary The oral argument in Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell consists of Isaacman’s arguments along with the justices’ questioning of both attorneys. Isaacman argued that parody, specifically the Campari Ad which contained a fake interview about Jerry Falwell’s incestuous relationship with his mother, should be protected by the First Amendment. On the other side of the argument, Grutman who represented Jerry Falwell argued that the speech should be held liable because it caused emotional distress.
The 1990 case of Employment Division v. Smith is about Smith and Black who were both members of a Native American Church and counselors at a private drug rehabilitation clinic. They were both fired because they had taken peyote as a part of their religious ceremonies, at that time the possession of peyote was a crime under the State law. The counselors filed for unemployment in the state, but were denied by the Employment Division because the reason for their unemployment was work-related misconduct. Smith and Black argued, stating that under the First Amendment the government is forbidden from prohibiting the "free exercise" of religion in this case the free exercise of peyote. Court of Appeals reversed the ruling, saying that denying them unemployment benefits for their religious use of peyote violated their right to as it was a part of their religion.
Payne asserted that the victim’s impact statement violated his Eight Amendment right. The Supreme Court of Tennessee upheld his sentence. Payne also appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Payne’s sentence. 3) Facts (20%)
This case is also regularly cited in other Supreme Court cases and is often a deciding factor. It has been used in cases like Konigsberg v. State Bar “That view, which of course cannot be reconciled with the law relating to libel, slander, misrepresentation, obscenity, perjury, false advertising, solicitation of crime, complicity by encouragement, conspiracy, and the like, is said to be compelled by the fact that the commands of the First Amendment are stated in unqualified terms: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble . . . . " But as Mr. Justice Holmes once said: "[T]he provisions of the Constitution are not mathematical formulas having their essence in their form; they are organic living institutions transplanted from English soil.
The state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which supported the ruling of the appeals
The issue in this case was whether school-sponsored nondenominational prayer in public schools violates the Establishment clause of the first amendment (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). This case dealt with a New York state law that had required public schools to open each day with the Pledge of Allegiance and a nondenominational prayer in which the students recognized their dependence upon God (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). This law had also allowed students to absent themselves from this activity if they found that it was objectionable. There was a parent that sued the school on behalf of their child. Their argument was that the law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as made applicable
The decision stated that the sixth amendment applied to states and now we are (Krajicek, Clarence Gideon
The government appealed the court of appeals decision to bring to the Supreme Court where it is now. I stand with full belief, and the majority opinion of the Supreme Court that Abel Fields’ conviction be overturned. His First Amendment rights had been violated. Even though he was
When people think of how government works, unless they’ve taken a government class, they usually think of Congress making laws and the President doing pretty much everything else. No one pays much attention to the Supreme Court unless there is a landmark case or something else to grab the news — like the recent death of Justice Antonin Scalia. But the Supreme Court does much more than you’d think regarding keeping the political machine running like a well-oiled … machine. Through not only interpretation of the law, but also judicial activism, the Supreme Court shows it can have as much influence over the laws of the land as either of the other branches of the federal government. In this paper, I will analyze the decision-making methods of the Court using the cases of Gideon v. Wainwright and Betts v. Brady.
The court noted that the material that Miller distributed by Miller was not protected under the first Amendment. The court said that the materials Miller distributed were offensive to people, therefore violates the California Statute. (“Miller v. California. ")This is a similar argument that is used
This law convicted about fourteen people, mostly Republican writers and newspaper editors (and one drunk who was
One of these cases is Patterson V. Colorado. Patterson published comics and articles about the Colorado Supreme Court. These comics criticized the judges of that court, and questioned many of their motives. Afterwards, Patterson was charged with contempt. He quickly moved to void the information by citing local law, the Colorado Constitution, and the Fourteenth Amendment of the constitution.
At the end of this case, the court had this to