Heckler's Veto Speech

As seen in previous cases like Tinker vs. Des Moines, students have the right to political say, unless it causes disruption at school of students are promoting something that goes against the law. In the case of Tinker v Des Moines the students were not promoting anything illegal but showed their thought on the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands (Tinker). Argued in court by Kenneth W. Starr in the Morse v. Frederick case, he gave the idea that the foundation for school censorship was the case of Tinker v. Des Moines (Morse). The Justices responded back saying, that case was a different scenario as the students weren 't doing anything against the law while Frederick was encouraging the use of marijuana which was illegal (Morse).

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.

Brown vs Board of Education was important because it was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. The first plaintiff was Oliver Brown, an African-American welder and assistant pastor. The case was brought against the Topeka Board of Education for not allowing his nine year old daughter, Linda, to attend Summer Elementary School, and all white school near their home. In 1954, there were four African-American schools and 18 white schools in Topeka.

The forefathers of the United States built this country on the ideals of freedom and equality for all people. Unfortunately, the fight for equality and freedom did not end with the revolutionary war. The fight has continued throughout the decades. Many of these issues were fought in the courtroom. Auburn University created an online Alabama Encyclopedia, there, the following quote stated, “Scottsboro became an international cause celebre that dramatically encapsulated the American south troubled post reconstruction history of legal and extralegal racial violence, the social and political upheaval of the great depression, and the lingering cultural divide between the north and south.”

In which Fraser gave an inappropriate speech which contained perverted and inferred sexual words in his speech to try an get one of his friends into office, but got suspended and was no longer allowed to speak at graduation. According to document E it says “Bethel school district acted within its permissible authority in imposing sanctions on Fraser after his inappropriate speech”. This quote shows students are limited to what they can say and can't really speak their minds without restrictions therefore this shows that this case restricts the 1st amendment rights of students even though the U.S promotes freedom of speech but nevertheless there are others way to speak without using indecent words and also it was within a place of learning. The court was right to decide in favor of the school because “A high school assembly or classroom is no place for a sexuality explict monologue.(Doc. E)”it was well within parameters of the school to punish him for using obscene and indecent speech at a school event as mentioned in document E earlier “The first Amendment does not prevent the schools officials from determining them to permit a vulgar and lewd speech such as the respondent's would undermine the school’s basic educational

In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, Martin Luther King, Jr. is responding to criticism of the peaceful protests and sit-in’s that were taking place in Birmingham, which led to his being arrested and the reason that he was in jail. He first responds to the accusation of being an “outsider” by setting the stage for his being in Birmingham due to being invited because of his ties to the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights organization and due to the fact that he is president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Next, Martin Luther King expands on his moral beliefs that there is “injustice” in the way that Birmingham is “the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States”.

This is where the contradiction of the first amendment and laws abide one another. Is it freedom of speech or is it a

In my eyes the solution to this problem is to make the ruling based upon protection of a person’s wellbeing first. I don’t believe it fair for one person to endanger another person or a group of people just so that they can express what they believe. A person’s safety is something sacred that a society should work to protect. This works around something called the reasonable limits clause6, which works to protect all rights up until they promote hate speech, violence or inequality. To solve conflicts I believe it best serves the interest of the people to violate the right that could endanger another person.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech”. Some people in today’s time would argue the first amendment is one of the most important listed in the Bill of Rights. Many forms of speech are protected by the first amendment that one wouldn’t think would be such as flag burning and “adult videos”. Over the years there have been many different court cases that have debated and fought the forms of speech that are protected. Many people in society treat speech differently and this is given in the United States because there are such diverse groups throughout the nation.

People have the tendency to take the First Amendment for granted, but some tend to use it to their favor. Stanley Fish presents his main argument about how people misuse this amendment for all their conflicts involving from racial issues to current political affairs in his article, Free-Speech Follies. His article involves those who misinterpret the First Amendment as their own works or constantly use it as an excuse to express their attitudes and desires about a certain subject matter. He expresses his personal opinions against those who consistently use the First Amendment as a weapon to defend themselves from harm of criticism.

I A. B. Cantwell v Connecticut (1940) D. Jesse Cantwell and his son going door to door in their neighborhood talking badly to people about the religion of catholicism which lead to two people becoming angry. This leads to the Cantwells being arrested for breaking a local ordinance that requires a permit for solicitation and also for encouraging an infraction of the peace E. Were the Cantwells first amendment free speech rights violated when they were religious views were suppressed and did they encourage an infraction of the peace or not. F.The court ruled that you could restrict general solicitation but you could not put limitation based on religion and that if you did so it would be trying to silence someone's views.

The idea of free speech on college campuses and the complications of it stem from those on campuses expressing views that don’t align with popular views. Implications for students who use the idea of free speech as a method for hateful actions and comments should be reprimanded, but the question remains as to whether schools should enforce tougher limitations. The freedom of speech on college campus expands to the freedoms of religion, assembly, press, and protest as well. Freedom of expression allows students to show their own political, social, and cultural views. Removing freedoms of speech and expression have consequences deeper than surface issues.

The ability to speak freely is written in the bill of rights and has been preserved for decades, but when free speech turns into hate speech it brings up the widely deliberated issue about banning hate speech. There are many different perspectives on the issue of hate speech. Author of Hate Speech is Free Speech, Gov. Dean and Law professor, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, applies a strong historical perspective on the situation arguing that people are “constitutionally illiter[ate]” when they make the claim that hate speech is not part of the First Amendment. Believing that it is impossible to ban hate speech because everyone will always disagree with any idea, Reynolds focuses on the problems with banning hate speech and what might happen if hate

People in this country have a constitutional right to practice free expression with few limits such as fighting words, true threats, defamation, incitement of lawless action, and obscenity. People do not have the right to silence others in a public venue. In recent years, conservative speakers have been threatened had their events stormed or shut down by students protesting the event of a violent and disruptive manner. Milo Yiannopoulos was shut down at UC Berkeley because many of the students there did not agree with his conservative viewpoint.

As human beings, we are all born with an entitlement of freedom of speech or synonymously known as freedom of expression as it is a basic human right. It is stated in the Federal Constitution and it is important for us human beings to protect our rights to freedom of speech and expression as it is the backbone for a democratic society. Having the right to express oneself freely without any restrictions is an essential part of what it means to be a free human being. Article 10 in the Federal Constitution states that; (a) every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression; (b) all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms; (c) all citizens have the right to form associations.