Schenck v. United States

• Background

  • During World War 1, Charles Schenck printed 15,000 anti-draft leaflets to discourage war participation

• Constitutional Question

  • Does the government’s prosecution and punishment for expressing opposition to the military draft during wartime violate the 1st Amendment’s free speech clause?

• Supreme Court Decision

  • During wartime, publishing anti-draft leaflets was a clear and present danger (speech that imposes an imminent threat and brings about substantial evils)

Gitlow v. New York

• Background

  • Gitlow arrested for distributing socialist literature

  • Charged under 1902 NY Criminal Anarchy Act

• Constitutional Question

  • Does the 1st Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech, prevent a state, under the NY Criminal Anarchy Act, from criminalizing subversive speech as applied through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment?

• Supreme Court Decision

  • States are not prevented from criminalizing subversive speech

  • A state may restrict speech that poses as a clear and present danger

  • They are not required to prove intent of action

  • Since Gitlow’s ideas called for rebellion, he was convicted

Brandenburg v. Ohio

• Background

  • Clarence Brandenburg, a leader in KKK, was convicted for making a speech under an Ohio law that made unlawful methods of political reform illegal (assemblage that incites crime)

• Constitutional Question

  • Did Ohio’s criminal syndicalism law, which prevented public speech that advocates for various illegal activities, violate Brandenburg’s 1st Amendment right to free speech as applied through the 14th Amendment’s due process clause?

• Supreme Court Decision

  • Ohio violated Brandenburg’s right to free speech

  • Test: Speech can be prohibited if it is directed at inciting action

    • This distinction could not be made

NYT v. US

• Background

  • Daniel Ellsberg published classified Pentagon Papers in 1971

  • Revealed government deception regarding the Vietnam conflict

  • US gov ordered NYT to refrain from printing on behalf of national security

• Constitutional Question

  • Can the executive branch block the printing of reporter-obtained classified government information in an effort to protect national secrets without violating the First Amendment’s free speech clause?

• Supreme Court Decision

  • Guarding diplomatic secrets is no real security to the people

  • Blocking free speech is unconstitutional

  • 1st Amendment acts against prior restraint

Yoder v. Wisconsin

• Background

  • Amish families in Wisconsin refused to send their children to school after 8th grade due to religious beliefs

  • State law required children to attend school until age 16

• Legal Issue

  • Did Wisconsin's law of compulsory school attendance law violate the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause as applied through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment?

• Supreme Court Decision

  • Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Amish families

  • The Court held that an individual's interests in the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment outweighed the State's interests in compelling school attendance beyond the eighth grade

Engel v. Vitale

• Background

  • William J. Vitale, a school board member in New York, introduced a voluntary prayer for recitation in public schools

  • The prayer was non-denominational and read: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country"

• Constitutional Question

  • Does a state-sponsored prayer in public schools that calls for a voluntary prayer violate the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause as applied through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment?

• Supreme Court Decision

  • In a 6-1 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the prayer was unconstitutional

  • The Court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits state-sponsored prayer in public schools

Lemon v. Kurtzman

• Background

  • David Kurtzman implemented a policy that approved public monies for parochial schools

  • These funds were allocated for various secular purposes, such as teacher salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials

• Constitutional Question

  • Do state statutes that allow for public funding to parochial schools violate the 1st Amendment Establishment Clause as applied through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment?

• Ruling

  • The Supreme Court ruled in a 8-0 decision that the state statutes were unconstitutional

  • The Court established the "Lemon Test" to determine if a law violates the Establishment Clause

• Lemon Test

  • The law must have a secular legislative purpose.

  • The law's primary effect must neither advance nor inhibit religion.

  • The law must not result in excessive entanglement between government and religion.

Eversen v. Boe

• Background

  • Everson challenged a New Jersey law providing transportation reimbursement to parents of private school students

  • The law was argued to violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment

• Constitutional Question

  • Did the New Jersey law that provided transportation reimbursement to parents of private school students violate the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause as applied through the 14th Amendment’s due process clause?

• Court Decision

  • The Supreme Court upheld the law, stating that it did not violate the Establishment Clause

  • The NJ law did not directly call for the advancement of one religion

Tinker v. Des Moines

• Background

  • Students Mary Beth Tinker, John Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam War in 1965

  • School officials suspended them for refusing to remove the armbands and causing potential disruption

• Constitutional Question

  • Does a public school ban on students wearing armbands in symbolic protest violate a student’s First Amendment right to free expression as applied through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment?

• Supreme Court Decision

  • The student’s 1st Amendment rights were violated

  • No actual disruption took place

• Time, Place, Manner Doctrine

  • The content-neutral policy failed to apply as the school intended to quiet the student’s anti-war messages, favoring one side of the conflict

  • Significant Governmental Interest

  • Adequate alternative ways of expression