Download Term 1: Constitutional Law and First Amendment Rights and more Quizzes Political Science in PDF only on Docsity!
Rust v. Sullivan 1991
Government money given to family planning can't be used to fund abortion or abortion related activities (including talking about it)Does gag rule violate first?SC: NO, just because government money can't be used to fund or talk about abortion doesn't prevent talking about abortion TERM 2
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
DEFINITION 2 The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 is a United States federal law that amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which regulates the financing of political campaigns. TERM 3
Constitutional tests
DEFINITION 3 Facially uncontitutional: law is unconst on its face and can't be applied in any casemore broadas applied: an other wise const law TERM 4
Citizens United v. FEC
DEFINITION 4 Court argued that they couldn't resolve the case in a more narrow fashionIf they did so it would "chill" political speech therefore they had to reconsider the constitutional questionsSC:1st amend is based on mistrust of gov, gov can't disfavour subjects or viewpoints or use law to favour certain speakers.gov can't use crime law to ban political speech by certain speakers TERM 5
Establishment
DEFINITION 5 A state religion (also called an official religion, established church or state church) is a religious body or creed officially endorsed by the state.
First
Amendment
Prohibits the making of any law1.respecting an establishment of religion,impeding thefree exercise of religion2. abridging thefreedom of speech, infringing on thefreedom of the press,3. interfering with theright to peaceably assembleor prohibiting thepetitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. TERM 7
Conflicting Interpretations
DEFINITION 7
- Strict Separation2. Strict Neutrality3. Non Preferentialist TERM 8
Non Preferentialist
DEFINITION 8 State promotes religion but not any single one TERM 9
Strict Neutrality
DEFINITION 9 dissent in everson Religion should compete with irreligion TERM 10
Strict Separation
DEFINITION 10
- may permit indirect support- majority in everson
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)
PA & RI statutes that Provided State Funds for Salary supplements & secular materialsDid they violate establishment?Unanimous Court: Statute violates Establ ClauseEC not merely about prohibiting set but no law respecting the estEstablishes Lemon Test TERM 17
Reynolds v. United States (1879)
DEFINITION 17 Morman polygamy test caseUnanimous Decision in favour of Congressstatute can punish criminal activity without regard of religious belief.What Next? Human Sactifice? How do we define religion?Yes freedom to exercise religion but conduct can be regulated when it disrupts "peace and order" TERM 18
Sherbert v. Verner 1963
DEFINITION 18 Member of 7th day adventist refused to work on saturday - got firedSo Caro law didn't allow her to receive unemploymentDid this violate free exercise? SC: YesBelief & Conduct Can be regulated if harmful to societythis case is not harmful to societyEven though burden on appellant is indirect it is still unfairEstablishes Sherbert test TERM 19
Sherbert Test
DEFINITION 19
- Court determines if individual has sincere religious beliefgovt action has a substantial burden on a persons ability to Act on that belief2. Govt must prove that burden is in compelling state interest,it has pursued that intrest in the least burdensome way TERM 20
Lemon Test
DEFINITION 20
- must not have a secular purpose, 2. must not effect (inhibit or advance a religion), 3. must not foster an excessive govt entanglement with religion
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
Amish parents prosecuted under wisconsin law requiring attendancein school until age 16Wisco upholds the lawSC: against state, education is important but balance is neededamish claims: must be religious beliefs generating claims-secondary schooling would be detrimental to children during an important developmental stage.Severe & inescapable danger, interposes a serious barrier into the amish community TERM 22
Barron v. Baltimore (1833)
DEFINITION 22 Baltimore charged with violation 5th amendCan BoR Be applied to state/municipalSC: No, there is no mention of applying to states TERM 23
West Virginia v. Barnette (1943)
DEFINITION 23 WV BoE law persecuted children & fams for not saluting the flagis this violation of freedom of speech?SC: Yes, actions can be a form of speech state can't force speech TERM 24
Schenck v. United States (1951)
DEFINITION 24 Schenck Prosecuted for violating espionage act printed, leaflets opposing draftDid act violate 1st amendmentSC: No, 1st amendment didn't protect agains in subordination, war time = greater restrictionsEstablished clear and present danger test TERM 25
Gitlow v. New York (1925)
DEFINITION 25 Gitlow convicted for distributing com manifesto, charged with plotting to overthrow us govdid conviction under ny law violate 1stSC: no speech may be regulated if incites crimeBoR extends to lower govs
Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993)
Mitchell charged with battery, punishment increased bc it was race related battery.Did increase of his sentence due to bigotry violate fist amendment?SC: No, wisconsin laws fell inline with anti discrimination laws, not punishing for beliefs or ideas rather punishing for actions
