First Amendment
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech, religion, and the press, as well as the right to assemble and petition the government. It is a cornerstone of American democracy, ensuring that individuals can express their opinions, beliefs, and grievances without fear of government censorship or reprisal. The First Amendment has been the subject of numerous legal interpretations and debates, shaping the country's approach to free expression.
5 Key excerpts on "First Amendment"
eBook - ePubLaw for Advertising, Broadcasting, Journalism, and Public Relations
Law for Advertising, Broadcasting, Journalism, and Public Relations
- Michael G. Parkinson, L. Marie Parkinson(Authors)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...3 The First Amendment: History and Application The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of opinion is that it is robbing the human race, posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth; if it is wrong, they lose what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. 1 Overview Civil Liberties and Civil Rights Bill of Rights History First Amendment Political Philosophies Judicial Review Overview The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution impacts virtually all laws in the fields of advertising, broadcasting, journalism, and public relations. This chapter introduces the basic concepts needed to understand when and how the First Amendment guarantees freedom to communications practitioners and when it restricts the applicability of other laws. Rather than present a chronology of First Amendment interpretations, this chapter is organized around four major concepts that facilitate understanding the meaning and application of the political philosophies that guide interpretation of the First Amendment’s provisions by the U.S. Supreme Court. We begin with an explanation of the difference between civil liberties and civil rights. Familiarity with these concepts is essential to understanding that the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and press, not a right of free press or a right of free speech. Furthermore, we explain that the First Amendment does not limit actions by corporations, individuals, and other nongovernmental entities. Because, on its face, the First Amendment only restricts actions by the federal government, it is important to know how some liberties from the Bill of Rights have been imposed on state governments...
- William Babcock, William H. Freivogel(Authors)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications, Inc(Publisher)
...5 First Amendment Theory The American legal foundation for freedom of expression is the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” Despite its categorical language, however, “no law” does not literally mean “no law.” While some scholars, most notably Alexander Meiklejohn, and some Supreme Court justices, such as Hugo Black and William O. Douglas, have advocated for this absolutist approach to free speech, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court has never adopted an absolutist position. In the United States, at times, certain kinds of expression can be prohibited or punished. When and how speech may be regulated depends on who is speaking, what is being said, and what harm might be caused by the speech. Judges, as final arbiters of the meaning of the First Amendment, must make these decisions. First Amendment theories are a way to predict and/or rationalize decisions about freedom of expression. Different scholars and jurists have advocated different theories, principles, or procedures to argue why expression should or should not be protected or to attempt to explain how judges make and/ or justify decisions. First Amendment theories have a long history, and few theorists agree on the range of speakers, expression, and circumstances First Amendment protection should encompass. For example, Meiklejohn argued that freedom of expression was most important for its ability to help individuals govern themselves in a democratic society. Therefore, to Meiklejohn political speech or speech related to self-government should be protected absolutely, while other speech should be unprotected by the First Amendment. Professor Lee Bollinger, on the other hand, wrote that freedom of expression was important as a way to reflect and develop a tolerant society...
eBook - ePub- Cliff Roberson(Author)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and non-religion. The First Amendment has two clauses tied to religion, the second forbidding any prohibition on the “the free exercise thereof,” and sometimes, the two clauses compete. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. The Supreme Court has placed a heavy burden on anyone trying to institute a prior restraint on the press. The liberty of the press is not confined to newspapers and periodicals. It necessarily embraces pamphlets and leaflets. These indeed have been historic weapons in the defense of liberty. There is no right to privacy expressly enumerated in the US Constitution. This freedom of speech and press necessarily protects the right to receive. This right to receive information and ideas, regardless of their social worth, is fundamental to our free society. If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a state has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch. Our whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men’s minds. Obscenity is not within the area of constitutionally protected speech or press. A school district’s policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer prior to school football games violated the establishment clause of the US Constitution. Prison regulations concerning the rejection of incoming publications, or of any incoming correspondence sent by prisoners or non-prisoners, do not violate First Amendment rights if such regulations are reasonably related to legitimate penological interests. PRACTICUM Gilbert, Arizona, adopted a municipal sign ordinance that regulated the way signs could be displayed in public areas. The ordinance imposed stricter limitations on signs advertising religious services than signs that displayed “political” or “ideological” messages...
eBook - ePub- Carmen Maye, Roy L. Moore, Erik L. Collins(Authors)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...1 The First Amendment Advertising and public relations students and practitioners picking up a 500-plus page book filled with examples and discussions of laws regulating advertising and public relations speech could be pardoned for being somewhat puzzled. After all, the language of the First Amendment to the federal Constitution clearly mandates that “Congress [and, by logical extension, any lesser unit of government] shall make no law … abridging freedom of speech or of the press.” 1 How can there be laws regulating any speech (let alone advertising or public relations speech) in the face of the Constitution’s emphatic statement that there can be “no law”? This puzzle requires us to begin with a brief overview of the First Amendment and how it is interpreted, before we turn our attention to the principal subject matter of this book. Development of First Amendment Jurisprudence The dilemma for courts faced with deciding cases that challenge the constitutionality of attempts by government to regulate speech and press is that despite the emphatic “no law” language of the First Amendment (see Appendix A), it is almost impossible to believe that those who helped add the amendment to the federal constitution more than 200 years ago meant to protect all speech without exception, even speech, for example, that is treasonous or criminally threatening or harmful to reputation. Yet judges and justices cannot simply ignore the First Amendment because they personally disapprove of the speech in question. Therefore, they have been obliged to develop a logical, rational and defensible method of interpretation by weighing and balancing the interests of those supporting freedom of expression against those favoring competing interests. To understand how they have accomplished this, we need to take a brief look both at how judges interpret law and how historians interpret history. Role-play the part of judge for a moment...
- Founding Fathers, James Madison(Authors)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- AA Press(Publisher)
...Amendments to the Constitution First Amendment — Freedom of Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, and Petition Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791. The first 10 amendments form the Bill of Rights 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. Second Amendment — Right to Bear Arms Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791. The first 10 amendments form the Bill of Rights A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Third Amendment — Quartering of Soldiers Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791. The first 10 amendments form the Bill of Rights No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Fourth Amendment — Search and Seizure Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791. The first 10 amendments form the Bill of Rights The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Fifth Amendment — Grand Jury, Double Jeopardy, Self Incrimination, Due Process, Takings Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791...
