First Amendment Primer -- IV with poll

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday February 02, 2010 · 1:00 PM PST

2010/02/02 · 13:00

Here are the stories of some brave individuals, mostly underdogs, and the times in which they lived.

They wanted passionately to express their views -- about corrupt government, civil rights, the Vietnam war, Ronald Reagan -- and the state wanted to shut them down.

Come along for the ride, feel the emotions, and see the full majesty of the First Amendment.

The first two cases are a warm-up for what follows.

Poll

18 votes Show Results

The Supreme Court

18 votes Vote Now!

The Supreme Court

got it right in Mills v. Alabama

2 votes

got it wrong in O'Brien

0 votes

got it basically right in Street v. New York

1 vote

got it right Schacht

0 votes

got it right in Spence

0 votes

got it right in Texas v. Johnson

0 votes

all of the above

10 votes

The Supreme Court sucks.

5 votes

First Amendment Primer -- III

jgtidd

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday February 01, 2010 · 12:27 PM PST

2010/02/01 · 12:27

Primer II establishes that by the late 1970s, the Supreme Court had established firmly that government may not ban hateful speech merely because it and the speaker (a Klan member in one case, Nazis in the other) are loathsome.

Put another way, the government may not ban "speech" simply based on (a) the content of the speech, or (b) the speaker's identity. This a core First Amendment principle.

Now we come to another particularly interesting First Amendment venue -- commercial advertising (e.g., a cigarette ad). To grasp the Citizens United case comprehensively, it's necessary to grasp the basic First Amendment law as to commercial advertising.

Poll

29 votes Show Results

The Supreme Court

29 votes Vote Now!

The Supreme Court

basically has gotten it right on commercial advertising

13 votes

basically has gotten it wrong

3 votes

should adjourn for the next 10 years

3 votes

is freaking insane

6 votes

wears funny looking robes

3 votes

lacks a sense of humor

1 vote

is filled with vitriol

0 votes

The First Amendment Primer -- II

jgtidd

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday January 31, 2010 · 7:04 AM PST

2010/01/31 · 07:04

Expressions are divided, for First Amendment purposes, into several categories. For convenience, I'll identify the categories this way.

"speech", which is given great protection.

"quasi speech", which is given some protection.

"Non speech", which may or may not be protected.

jgtidd

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday January 30, 2010 · 11:20 AM PST

2010/01/30 · 11:20

I don't think it's fair to say we know exactly what the Founders had in mind when they crafted the First Amendment. But we have their words:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

jgtidd

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Friday January 29, 2010 · 2:52 PM PST

2010/01/29 · 14:52

Goddamn right.

Citizens United means an expansion of the First Amendment.

By all means, let's restrict the First Amendment.

RSS

First Amendment Primer -- IV with poll

First Amendment Primer -- III

The First Amendment Primer -- II

A First Amendment Primer

Citizens United Unbridled