Chapter 4 Civil liberties
Chapter 4 Civil Liberties
Civil liberties versus civil Rights civil liberties involve restraining the governments action against individuals civil rights are rights all individuals share as provided for in the 14 amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law
Civil Liberties versus Civil Rights • civil liberties involve restraining the government’s action against individuals • civil rights are rights all individuals share as provided for in the 14th amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law
Table 4-1: Incorporating the Bill of ights into the fourteenth amendment Amendment Year Issue Court Case Involved 1925 Freedom of speech Gitlow y. New york. 268 U.S. 652 1931 Freedom of the press Nearv. Minnesota. 283 U.S. 697 1932 Right to a lawyer in capital punishment cases V Powell v. Alabama. 287US. 45 1937 Freedom of assembly and right to petition De Jonge v Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 1940 Freedom of religion Cantwellv Connecticut 310 U.S. 296 1947 Separation of church and state Everson v Board of Education, 330 U.S.I 1948 Right to a public trial In re Oliver. 333 U.S. 257 1949 No unreasonable searches and seizures Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 1961 Exclus ionary rule Mapp v Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 1962 No cruel and unusual punishment VIII Robinson v California, 370 U.S. 660 1963 Right to a lawyer in all criminal felony cases V Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 1964 No compulsory self-incrimination Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.s.I 1965 Right to privacy I,Ⅲ,ⅣVVⅨX「 Griswold v. Connecticut,381U.s.479 1966 Right to an impartial jury Parker v Gladden. 385US 363 1967 Right to a speedy trial V Klopfer v North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213 1969 No double jeopardy Benton v. Maryland, 395US 784
Table 4-1: Incorporating the Bill of Rights into the Fourteenth Amendment Year Issue Amendment Involved Court Case 1925 1931 1932 1937 1940 1947 1948 1949 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1969 Freedom of speech Freedom of the press Right to a lawyer in capital punishment cases Freedom of assembly and right to petition Freedom of religion Separation of church and state Right to a public trial No unreasonable searches and seizures Exclusionary rule No cruel and unusual punishment Right to a lawyer in all criminal felony cases No compulsory self-incrimination Right to privacy Right to an impartial jury Right to a speedy trial No double jeopardy I I VI I I I VI IV IV VIII VI V I, III, IV, V, IX VI VI V Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652. Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697. Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45. De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353. Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296. Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1. In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257. Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25. Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643. Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335. Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479. Parker v. Gladden, 385 U.S. 363. Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213. Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784
Freedom of religion Separation of church and state comes from the 1 st amendment · establishment clause state aid to church-related schools Issues concerning separation of church and state Include schoolⅴ ouchers prayer in schoolS teaching evolution religious speech
Freedom of Religion: • Separation of Church and State – comes from the 1st amendment • establishment clause • state aid to church-related schools • Issues concerning separation of church and state include: – school vouchers – prayer in schools – teaching evolution – religious speech
Freedom of Religion(cont Free Exercise comes from the 1st amendment means that no type of religious practice can be prohibited and restricted by the government
Freedom of Religion (cont.) • Free Exercise – comes from the 1st amendment – means that no type of religious practice can be prohibited and restricted by the government
Freedom of Expression No prior restraint-the Supreme Court has been critical of government efforts to censor expression (prior restraint) The Supreme Court has protected some forms of speech symbolic speech commercial speech(though in Nike v Kasky 2003), the court did not protect commerical h speec
Freedom of Expression • No prior restraint – the Supreme Court has been critical of government efforts to censor expression (prior restraint) • The Supreme Court has protected some forms of speech: – symbolic speech – commercial speech (though in Nike v. Kasky (2003), the court did not protect commerical speech
Freedom of Expression Permitted restrictions speech that presents aclear and present danger speech speech that might lead to some evil (the bad tendency rule)
Freedom of Expression Permitted restrictions: – speech that presents a “clear and present danger” – speech speech that might lead to some “evil “(the bad tendency rule)
Freedom of Expression Unprotected speech · obscenit ° hate speech Slander
Freedom of Expression Unprotected speech • obscenity • hate speech • slander
Freedom of the press press has some protection from libel charges libel must be accompanied by actual malice the press is now protected from gag orders during trials, except in unusual circumstances radio and t v have much more limited 1st amendment protections they are subject to the equal time rule
Freedom of the Press • press has some protection from libel charges • libel must be accompanied by actual malice • the press is now protected from gag orders during trials, except in unusual circumstances • radio and t.v. have much more limited 1st amendment protections • they are subject to the equal time rule
The right to assemble and Petition the government can be limited by municipalities right to offer permits for marches protected by the 1st amendment
The Right to Assemble and Petition the Government • can be limited by municipalities right to offer permits for marches • protected by the 1st amendment
