Amer Gov't Chap 4
Terms in this set (32)
Either knowledge of a defamatory statement's falsity or a reckless disregard for the truth.
The first act in a criminal proceeding, in which the defendant is brought before a court to hear the charges against him or her and enter a plea of guilty or not guilty
Clear and Present Danger Test
The test proposed by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes for determining when government may restrict free speech. Restrictions are permissible, he argued, only when speech creates a clear and present danger to the public order. Expression may be restricted if evidence exists that such expression would cause a dangerous condition, actual or imminent, that Congress has the power to prevent. In 1920 Justice Louis D. Brandeis said "Correctly applied, it will reserve the right of free speech....from suppression by tyrannists, well meaning majorities and from abuse by irresponsible, fanatical minorities.
Advertising statements which increasingly have been given First Amendment protection.
Defamation of Character
Wrongfully hurting a person's good reputation. The law imposes a general duty on all persons to refrain from making false defamatory statements about others.
The part of the First Amendment prohibiting the establishment of a church officially supported by the national government. It is applied to questions of the legality of giving state and local government aid to religious organizations and schools, allowing or requiring school prayers, and teaching evolution versus intelligent design.
A judicial policy prohibiting the admission at trial of illegally seized evidence.
Free Exercise Clause
The provision of the First Amendment guaranteeing the free exercise of religion. The provision constrains the national government from prohibiting individuals from practicing the religion of their choice.
An order issued by a judge restricting the publication of news about a trial or a pretrial hearing to protect the accused's right to a fair trial.
The view that most of the protections of the Bill of Rights apply to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause
A written defamation of a person's character, reputation, business, or property rights.
Restraining an activity before it has actually occurred. When expression is involved, this means censorship.
A public official, a public employee who exercises substantial governmental power, or any other person, such as a movie star, known to the public because of his or her position or activities.
The public uttering of a false statement that harms the good reputation of another. The statement must be made to, or within the hearing of, persons other than the defamed party.
Expression made through articles of clothing, gestures, movements, and other forms of nonverbal conduct. Symbolic speech is given substantial protection by the courts.
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Habeas corpus means, literally, "you have the body." A writ of habeas corpus is an order that requires jailers to bring a prisoner before a court or a judge and explain why the person is being held.
Everson v. Board of Education
A New Jersey law allowing reimbursements of money to parents who sent their children to school (public and private) on buses operated by the public transportation system did not violate the establishment clause or the 1st and 14th Amendments
Engel v. Vitale
1962; state officials violated the 1st amendment when they wrote a prayer to be recited by NYs schoolchildren
Miller v. California
Created the "Miller Test." A work is obscene and may be regulated/restricted if it (1) appeals to prurient interests in sex, (2) portrays sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and (3) lacks literary, artistic, political or scientific value. Hint: Case deals with pornography... which, like Miller beer, is vice.
Texas v. Johnson
Facts: Johnson burned a US flag during a protest. Court Rule: Johnson due to 1st Amendment. Impact: freedom of speech (symbolic speech)
Gitlow v. New York
1925 (1951 & 1969) The Court introduced the bad-tendency rule. According to this rule, speech or other First Amendment freedoms may be curtailed if there is a possibility that such expression might lead to some evil. In this case, a member of a left-wing group was convicted of violating NY State's criminal anarchy statute when he published and distributed a pamphlet urging the violent overthrow of the U.S. government. In its majority opinion, the Supreme Court held that although the First Amendment afforded protection against state incursions on freedom of expression, Gitlow could be punished legally in this particular instance because his expression would tend to bring about evils that the state had a right to prevent.
Griswold v. Connecticut
Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple's ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives? • Yes • Majority: Warren • Though the Constitution does not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, the various guarantees within the Bill of Rights create zones, that establish a right to privacy. Together, the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments, create a new constitutional right, the right to privacy in marital relations. Ninth specifically- 1-8 does not exhaust your rights, privacy was not given but the 9th lets court write it in and therefore it exists • Individuals have a right to privacy in which the state cannot infringe.
Roe v. Wade
Gideon v. Wainwright
(1963)The 6th amendment right counsel is applicable to state proceedings through the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment. The right to counsel applies every time an accused is charged with a felony offense.
Miranda v. Arizona
5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments, rights of the accused) you have the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against you, that he has the right to an attorney ....., Miranda rights
Furman v. Georgia
8th Amendment Capital punishment. It raised the question of racial imbalances in the use of the death penalty by state courts. Many states rewrote the death penalty statutes.
Mapp v. Ohio
a landmark case in the area of U.S. criminal procedure, in which the United States Supreme Court decided that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against "unreasonable searches and seizures" may not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts, as well as federal courts.
Dennis v. U.S.
1951 case, The supreme court modified the clear and present danger test. Twelve members of the American Communist Party were convicted of violating a statute that made it a crime to conspire, to teach, advocate, or organize the violent overthrow of any government in the U.S. The Supreme court affirmed the convictions, significantly modifying the clear and present danger test in the process. The court applied a grave and probable danger rule. Under this rule "the gravity of the 'evil' discounted by its improbability justifies such invasion of free speech as is necessary to avoid the danger" This rule gave much less protection to free speech than did the clear and present danger test.
Bad tendency rule
Curtailing of 1st amendment rights if you advocate evil
Grave and Probable Danger Rule
Under this rule "the gravity of the 'evil' discounted by its improbability justifies such invasion of free speech as is necessary to avoid the danger" This rule gave much less protection to free speech than did the clear and present danger test.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
1969-Brandenburg, a leader of the Ku Klux Klan, made a speech at a Klan rally and was later convicted under an Ohio criminal syndicalism law. Law was found unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. States were not allowed to punish or prevent inflammatory speech unless it will lead to imminent lawless action. Case that some claim achieved true freedom of political speech.
Lee v. Weisman
no rabbis at graduation, public schools may not have clergy lead prayers at graduation ceremonies