1. Issue: Can the press print articles that are against the government if the Information is true? 2. Case Summary: John Peter Zenger was charged with printing information inflammatory to the Governor of New York. The governor charged him with libel (written untruths that harm a person’s reputation) 3. The jury found Zenger not guilty because he was telling the truth about the governor. 4. Outcome: Case set a precedent for freedom of the press in the colonies.

 Set Precedent for Freedom of Press in the Colonies.  Led to Free Press (in 1 st Amendment)

1. Issue: Is Freedom of Speech absolute? 2. Case Summary: Schenk distributed anti-military, anti-draft propaganda advocating that people oppose the draft. He was charged with and convicted of violating the Espionage Act. 3. The Supreme Court ruled that the 1 st Amendment is not absolute. You must consider the time and circumstance. 4. Outcome: In certain situations, free speech is not absolute. (you can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre, when there is no fire) 5. 1 st amendment freedom in question: Speech

 Freedom of Speech NOT absolute; must consider time and place.  Free Speech

1. Issue: Is prayer in public schools a violation of the Establishment clause? 2. Case Summary: Plaintiff complained that school was starting the day with a prayer, against families religion. 3. Supreme Court ruled that prayer in public school was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause. 4. Outcome: banned prayer in public schools 5. 1 st amendment freedom in question: Religion

 Banned Prayer in public Schools  1 st Amendment freedom of Religion.

1. Issue: Does the 1 st amendment protect students wearing armbands in public schools as a form of protest? 2. Case Summary: John and Mary Beth Tinker wore black armbands to school in protest of the Vietnam War and was suspended. 3. Supreme Court upheld students 1 st Amendment rights to protest by wearing armbands. 4. Outcome: Tinker is one of the few cases that have upheld the rights of students in a school setting and is still cited as a court precedent st amendment freedom in question: Speech

 The Armband case  Students right to free expression upheld.  1 st Amendment Free Speech

1. Issue: Can the US government stop the publication of information on grounds of national security (prior restraint)? 2. Case Summary: The US Government wanted to stop the New York Times from printing the “Pentagon Papers”. 3. The Supreme Court upheld the rights of the New York Times, saying the government had not met the burden of a national security threat. 4. Outcome: New precedent for freedom of the press st amendment freedom in question: Press

 Court ruled against prior restraint  Upheld Freedom of Press (1 st )

1. Issue: Does freedom of speech in school include the use of vulgar language? 2. Case Summary: Student gave a speech that had vulgar language/innuendo. Teachers advised him not to use the bad language. Student was suspended. 3. Supreme Court ruled that schools can limit free speech at school events. 4. Outcome: Students freedom of speech is limited at school st amendment freedom in question: Speech

 Students free speech in school limited  1 st Amendment Free Speech

1. Issue: Can principle censor a school publication such as a school newspaper? 2. Case Summary: Students wanted to publish article about teen pregnancy. The Principal of the school would not let them publish the article. 3. Supreme Court agreed with the principal and ruled that because the school newspaper is part of the education process, it can be censored. 4. Outcome: Students freedom of speech limited st amendment freedom in question: Speech

 Teen pregnancy newspaper case  Court upheld School administrators right to limit free speech of students  1 st amendment free speech

1. Issue: Is flag burning a legal expression of free speech? 2. Case Summary: Johnson burned flag as a protest of the Regan administration. He was arrested and convicted of flag desecration. 3. Supreme Court ruled that flag burning was a constitutional right of freedom of speech/expression. 4. Outcome: Flag burning in the United States is legal st amendment freedom in question: Speech

 Flag burning a legal form of expression  1 st Amendment

1. Issue: Was the Texas abortion statute which forbids women to have an abortion except in cases where there is a threat to the mother legal? 2. Case Summary: Norma McCorvey wanted to have an abortion, but could not due to the Texas abortion statute, she challenged the Texas Law. 3. Supreme Court ruled that women can abort their pregnancy up until the viability of the fetus. 4. Outcome: Abortion has become a very controversial issue between pro-choice and pro-life groups. States have tried to pass laws to limit abortions some of which have been struck down by the Supreme Court. (Norma McCorvey had her baby) 5. Amendment in Question: 4 th and 9 th Amendments

 Abortion case  Court ruled abortion is legal  4 th and 9 th Amendment: privacy

1. Issue: Is segregation of the races in public schools unconstitutional? 2. Case Summary: Brown’s daughter passed an all-white school on way to black school, but “separate but equal” is segregation and has been upheld by the Supreme Court on several occasions. 3. Supreme Court ruled that “Separate but equal” is inherently unequal and causes harm to African American students. 4. Amendment in question: 14 th Amendment equal protection under the law clause.

 Court ended Segregation in public schools  14 th Amendment equal protection

1. Issue: Is the application of affirmative action constitutional? 2. Case Summary: Alan Bakke, a white student, applied to medical school under special admissions standard for minority groups. African Americans were admitted to the school with lower scores than Bakke and he believed that he was a victim of reverse discrimination. 3. Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action was constitutional, but quota systems based on race is unconstitutional. Race could be one factor of many, but not the only factor. 4. Outcome: This case led to controversy over quota systems, but later cases, Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger, firmly rejected quotas, but reaffirmed that race can be one factor among many. 5. Amendment in Question: 14 th Amendment

 Affirmative action is legal, but racial quotas are not.  14 th Amendment equal protection