Civil liberties Chapter 4.

Civil liberties Chapter 4

Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Learning Objectives 4.1 Identify what civil liberties are 4.2 Explain why civil liberties are limited in times of crisis 4.3 Distinguish what rights of expression the First Amendment protects 4.4 Determine what religious freedoms the First Amendment protects 4.5 Outline how the “right to bear arms” has been interpreted 4.6 Describe what protections the Bill of Rights provides to those accused of crimes 4.7 Assess what constitutes the right to privacy Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

What Are Civil Liberties?
Civil Liberties and Civil Rights so fundamental that they are outside the authority of government to regulate Balancing Liberty and Order civil liberties: Those rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, that are so fundamental that they are outside the authority of government to regulate. Bill of Rights: First ten amendments to the Constitution, which provide basic political rights. Natural (unalienable) rights: Rights that every individual has and that government cannot legitimately take away. writ of habeas corpus: Right of individuals who have been arrested and jailed to go before a judge, who determines whether their detention is legal incorporate: Process of applying provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. Selective incorporation: Doctrine used by the Supreme Court to make those provisions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental rights binding on the states. compelling interest test: Standard frequently used by the Supreme Court in civil liberties cases to determine whether a state has a compelling interest for infringing on a right and whether the law is narrowly drawn to meet that interest. Key Questions: Which is more important to you, liberty or order? Which is more important to you, liberty or equality? Which government are citizens more likely to need a gate against – national or state? What laws, if any, should protect the American flag?

Constitutional Rights The articles of the Constitution protect civil liberties in all of the following: writ of habeas corpus. Right of individuals who have been arrested and jailed to go before a judge, who determines whether their detention is legal ex post facto laws. bills of attainder. trial by jury. civil liberties: Those rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, that are so fundamental that they are outside the authority of government to regulate. Bill of Rights: First ten amendments to the Constitution, which provide basic political rights. Natural (unalienable) rights: Rights that every individual has and that government cannot legitimately take away. writ of habeas corpus: Right of individuals who have been arrested and jailed to go before a judge, who determines whether their detention is legal incorporate: Process of applying provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. Selective incorporation: Doctrine used by the Supreme Court to make those provisions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental rights binding on the states. compelling interest test: Standard frequently used by the Supreme Court in civil liberties cases to determine whether a state has a compelling interest for infringing on a right and whether the law is narrowly drawn to meet that interest. Key Questions: Which is more important to you, liberty or order? Which is more important to you, liberty or equality? Which government are citizens more likely to need a gate against – national or state? What laws, if any, should protect the American flag?

Bill of Rights: First 10 amendments The Bill of Rights placed into law some of the natural or inalienable rights that Thomas Jefferson spoke about in the Declaration of Independence Bill of Rights: First ten amendments to the Constitution, which provide basic political rights. Natural (unalienable) rights: Rights that every individual has and that government cannot legitimately take away. writ of habeas corpus: Right of individuals who have been arrested and jailed to go before a judge, who determines whether their detention is legal incorporate: Process of applying provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. Selective incorporation: Doctrine used by the Supreme Court to make those provisions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental rights binding on the states. compelling interest test: Standard frequently used by the Supreme Court in civil liberties cases to determine whether a state has a compelling interest for infringing on a right and whether the law is narrowly drawn to meet that interest. Key Questions: Which is more important to you, liberty or order? Which is more important to you, liberty or equality? Which government are citizens more likely to need a gate against – national or state? What laws, if any, should protect the American flag?

The Bill of Rights and the States Originally applied to federal government only Started to apply to states end of 19th century Fourteenth Amendment Ratified in Provided basis for applying Bill of Rights to the states Selective incorporation: Process of applying provisions of Bill of Rights to states Bill of Rights: First ten amendments to the Constitution, which provide basic political rights. Natural (unalienable) rights: Rights that every individual has and that government cannot legitimately take away. writ of habeas corpus: Right of individuals who have been arrested and jailed to go before a judge, who determines whether their detention is legal incorporate: Process of applying provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. Selective incorporation: Doctrine used by the Supreme Court to make those provisions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental rights binding on the states. compelling interest test: Standard frequently used by the Supreme Court in civil liberties cases to determine whether a state has a compelling interest for infringing on a right and whether the law is narrowly drawn to meet that interest. Key Questions: Which is more important to you, liberty or order? Which is more important to you, liberty or equality? Which government are citizens more likely to need a gate against – national or state? What laws, if any, should protect the American flag?

Beginning in 1897, the Supreme Court slowly began to use the protection of “life, liberty, or property” in the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause to incorporate some of the provisions of the Bill of Rights as binding on the states. Rights that have been incorporated include: Right to keep and bear arms Freedom of speech Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure Protection from double jeopardy Bill of Rights: First ten amendments to the Constitution, which provide basic political rights. Natural (unalienable) rights: Rights that every individual has and that government cannot legitimately take away. writ of habeas corpus: Right of individuals who have been arrested and jailed to go before a judge, who determines whether their detention is legal incorporate: Process of applying provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. Selective incorporation: Doctrine used by the Supreme Court to make those provisions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental rights binding on the states. compelling interest test: Standard frequently used by the Supreme Court in civil liberties cases to determine whether a state has a compelling interest for infringing on a right and whether the law is narrowly drawn to meet that interest. Key Questions: Which is more important to you, liberty or order? Which is more important to you, liberty or equality? Which government are citizens more likely to need a gate against – national or state? What laws, if any, should protect the American flag?

Should civil liberties subject to majority rule? If a majority wishes to abridge rights, it often falls to the judiciary to protect those rights. civil liberties: Those rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, that are so fundamental that they are outside the authority of government to regulate. Bill of Rights: First ten amendments to the Constitution, which provide basic political rights. Natural (unalienable) rights: Rights that every individual has and that government cannot legitimately take away. writ of habeas corpus: Right of individuals who have been arrested and jailed to go before a judge, who determines whether their detention is legal incorporate: Process of applying provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. Selective incorporation: Doctrine used by the Supreme Court to make those provisions of the Bill of Rights that are fundamental rights binding on the states. compelling interest test: Standard frequently used by the Supreme Court in civil liberties cases to determine whether a state has a compelling interest for infringing on a right and whether the law is narrowly drawn to meet that interest. Key Questions: Which is more important to you, liberty or order? Which is more important to you, liberty or equality? Which government are citizens more likely to need a gate against – national or state? What laws, if any, should protect the American flag? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The Supreme Court often applies the compelling interest test in deciding whether the federal government or a state can limit rights The government must have a compelling interest in passing a law that limits rights The law must be narrowly drawn to meet the governmental interest Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Constitutional Amendments That Pertain to Civil Liberties
Figure 4.2 Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Civil Liberties in Times of Crisis
From Revolution to Civil War The Sedition Act: Illegal to speak against U S Government The World Wars The Espionage Act: Illegal to obstruct military recruiting marketplace of ideas: Idea that the government should not restrict the expression of ideas because the people are capable of accepting good ideas and rejecting bad ones. Examples show that in times of crisis, Congress and the president limit civil liberties to secure order, often with public support. Key Questions: What civil liberties are you willing to give up to ensure more protection against terrorist attacks? How free should you be to criticize the government? Should you be less free in wartime? Following 9/11? Can you trust the people to decide whether an idea has merit? Do good ideas survive and bad ideas fade away? Should enemy combatants have the same procedural safeguards as American citizens? What if the enemy combatant is an American citizen? Should government imprison people for their political views? Or should views, such as belief in Communism and/or religious war (for example, jihad) be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Are alleged terrorists enemy combatants? Should the United States obey the Geneva Convention? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The Cold War and Vietnam U.S. worried about communism The crackdown on socialists, Communists, and other radicals was called the red scare During the McCarthy Era, Congress banned the Communist Party and membership therein, and held hearings investigating individual citizens’ political views and personal associations. marketplace of ideas: Idea that the government should not restrict the expression of ideas because the people are capable of accepting good ideas and rejecting bad ones. Examples show that in times of crisis, Congress and the president limit civil liberties to secure order, often with public support. Key Questions: What civil liberties are you willing to give up to ensure more protection against terrorist attacks? How free should you be to criticize the government? Should you be less free in wartime? Following 9/11? Can you trust the people to decide whether an idea has merit? Do good ideas survive and bad ideas fade away? Should enemy combatants have the same procedural safeguards as American citizens? What if the enemy combatant is an American citizen? Should government imprison people for their political views? Or should views, such as belief in Communism and/or religious war (for example, jihad) be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Are alleged terrorists enemy combatants? Should the United States obey the Geneva Convention? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The Cold War and Vietnam In the mid-1960s, COINTELPRO, the counterintelligence program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), infiltrated and disrupted groups that expressed opposition to mainline American policies, including antiwar groups, civil rights groups, left-wing groups, and white supremacy groups. marketplace of ideas: Idea that the government should not restrict the expression of ideas because the people are capable of accepting good ideas and rejecting bad ones. Examples show that in times of crisis, Congress and the president limit civil liberties to secure order, often with public support. Key Questions: What civil liberties are you willing to give up to ensure more protection against terrorist attacks? How free should you be to criticize the government? Should you be less free in wartime? Following 9/11? Can you trust the people to decide whether an idea has merit? Do good ideas survive and bad ideas fade away? Should enemy combatants have the same procedural safeguards as American citizens? What if the enemy combatant is an American citizen? Should government imprison people for their political views? Or should views, such as belief in Communism and/or religious war (for example, jihad) be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Are alleged terrorists enemy combatants? Should the United States obey the Geneva Convention? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The War on Terror After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress passed the Act, which overturned many of the COINTELPRO reforms, by allowing greater sharing of intelligence information and enhancing law enforcement’s ability to tap telephone and e- mail communications. Civil Liberties and American Values marketplace of ideas: Idea that the government should not restrict the expression of ideas because the people are capable of accepting good ideas and rejecting bad ones. Examples show that in times of crisis, Congress and the president limit civil liberties to secure order, often with public support. Key Questions: What civil liberties are you willing to give up to ensure more protection against terrorist attacks? How free should you be to criticize the government? Should you be less free in wartime? Following 9/11? Can you trust the people to decide whether an idea has merit? Do good ideas survive and bad ideas fade away? Should enemy combatants have the same procedural safeguards as American citizens? What if the enemy combatant is an American citizen? Should government imprison people for their political views? Or should views, such as belief in Communism and/or religious war (for example, jihad) be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Are alleged terrorists enemy combatants? Should the United States obey the Geneva Convention? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The War on Terror The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act created secret courts designed to over see the domestic activities of the National Security Agency. In 2013, Edward Snowden revealed classified documents detailing the NSA keeping records of every phone call made in the United States. marketplace of ideas: Idea that the government should not restrict the expression of ideas because the people are capable of accepting good ideas and rejecting bad ones. Examples show that in times of crisis, Congress and the president limit civil liberties to secure order, often with public support. Key Questions: What civil liberties are you willing to give up to ensure more protection against terrorist attacks? How free should you be to criticize the government? Should you be less free in wartime? Following 9/11? Can you trust the people to decide whether an idea has merit? Do good ideas survive and bad ideas fade away? Should enemy combatants have the same procedural safeguards as American citizens? What if the enemy combatant is an American citizen? Should government imprison people for their political views? Or should views, such as belief in Communism and/or religious war (for example, jihad) be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Are alleged terrorists enemy combatants? Should the United States obey the Geneva Convention? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Too much freedom can lead to anarchy, a state in which everyone does as he or she chooses without regard to others. Too much order can lead to tyranny, a state in which the people are not free to make decisions about the private aspects of their lives. marketplace of ideas: Idea that the government should not restrict the expression of ideas because the people are capable of accepting good ideas and rejecting bad ones. Examples show that in times of crisis, Congress and the president limit civil liberties to secure order, often with public support. Key Questions: What civil liberties are you willing to give up to ensure more protection against terrorist attacks? How free should you be to criticize the government? Should you be less free in wartime? Following 9/11? Can you trust the people to decide whether an idea has merit? Do good ideas survive and bad ideas fade away? Should enemy combatants have the same procedural safeguards as American citizens? What if the enemy combatant is an American citizen? Should government imprison people for their political views? Or should views, such as belief in Communism and/or religious war (for example, jihad) be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Are alleged terrorists enemy combatants? Should the United States obey the Geneva Convention? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

During times of war, the government's increased concern for order and citizens' increased concerns about security generally find civil liberties being limited Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The First Amendment and Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Speech Advocacy of Unlawful Activities Clear and present danger test: state must prove there is a high likelihood that the speech in question would lead to a danger that Congress has a right to prevent. In a World War I speech case, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that speech was not absolute, such as a person does not have the right to falsely shout fire in a crowded theater. clear and present danger test: First Amendment test that requires the state to prove there is a high likelihood that the speech in question would lead to a danger that Congress has a right to prevent. symbolic speech: Actions, such as burning the flag, that convey a political message without spoken words. content-neutral: Free speech doctrine that allows certain types of regulation of speech, as long as the restriction does not favor one side or another of a controversy. Key Questions: Given the nature of terrorist attacks, is it possible to establish a “clear and present danger” before prosecuting the advocacy of unlawful activities? How can you distinguish between fighting words and hate speech? Does your college have a speech code? Should your college regulate what you can and cannot say? Can trigger warnings lead to censorship in college classrooms? What is more important, freedom of speech or an equal and non-hostile educational environment? Should Americans be required to salute the flag? Should they be prevented from burning the flag? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Freedom of Speech Fighting Words: phrases that might lead the individual to whom they are directed to respond with a punch Hate Speech Cross burning by the KKK Picketing at funerals of U.S. soldiers clear and present danger test: First Amendment test that requires the state to prove there is a high likelihood that the speech in question would lead to a danger that Congress has a right to prevent. symbolic speech: Actions, such as burning the flag, that convey a political message without spoken words. content-neutral: Free speech doctrine that allows certain types of regulation of speech, as long as the restriction does not favor one side or another of a controversy. Key Questions: Given the nature of terrorist attacks, is it possible to establish a “clear and present danger” before prosecuting the advocacy of unlawful activities? How can you distinguish between fighting words and hate speech? Does your college have a speech code? Should your college regulate what you can and cannot say? Can trigger warnings lead to censorship in college classrooms? What is more important, freedom of speech or an equal and non-hostile educational environment? Should Americans be required to salute the flag? Should they be prevented from burning the flag? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Freedom of Speech College speech codes The courts have consistently ruled that speech codes violate the First Amendment. Time, Place, and Manner Regulations Symbolic Speech In the 1960s, the Supreme Court ruled that certain types of nonverbal activities, such as flag burning or students wearing black armbands to school, were protected under the First Amendment as symbolic speech clear and present danger test: First Amendment test that requires the state to prove there is a high likelihood that the speech in question would lead to a danger that Congress has a right to prevent. symbolic speech: Actions, such as burning the flag, that convey a political message without spoken words. content-neutral: Free speech doctrine that allows certain types of regulation of speech, as long as the restriction does not favor one side or another of a controversy. Key Questions: Given the nature of terrorist attacks, is it possible to establish a “clear and present danger” before prosecuting the advocacy of unlawful activities? How can you distinguish between fighting words and hate speech? Does your college have a speech code? Should your college regulate what you can and cannot say? Can trigger warnings lead to censorship in college classrooms? What is more important, freedom of speech or an equal and non-hostile educational environment? Should Americans be required to salute the flag? Should they be prevented from burning the flag? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

In 2002, high school student Joseph Frederick unfurled this banner while his class watched the Olympic Torch relay pass through Juneau, Alaska. When the principal suspended Frederick for the banner’s message about drugs, Frederick sued, saying that his free speech rights had been violated. The court of appeals, relying on the Tinker case, reversed the suspension, but in 2007, the Supreme Court upheld it, saying a student’s free speech rights did not extend to the promotion of illegal drugs. Source: Clay Good/Zuma Press Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Libel: The publishing of false and damaging statements about another person is not protected by the First Amendment Slander: Voicing of false and damaging statements about another person is not protected by the First Amendment prior restraint: Government restrictions on freedom of the press that prevent material from being published. Miller test: Supreme Court test for determining whether material is obscene. Key Questions Should the American Nazi Party, the Ku Klux Klan, or the Communist Party be allowed to march in public streets? Should their ideas be suppressed, or should they be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Should pornography be submitted to the marketplace of ideas? Or should it be censored? On what legal grounds? Which is more important to you, freedom of association or laws banning discrimination? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Freedom of the Press Prior Restraint: an extraordinary burden of proof of imminent harm is needed before the courts will shut down a newspaper before a story is printed. Subsequent Punishment Miller test: a three-pronged test developed by the Supreme Court to determine whether material can be deemed obscene. The Right of Association prior restraint: Government restrictions on freedom of the press that prevent material from being published. Miller test: Supreme Court test for determining whether material is obscene. Key Questions Should the American Nazi Party, the Ku Klux Klan, or the Communist Party be allowed to march in public streets? Should their ideas be suppressed, or should they be allowed to be tested in the marketplace of ideas? Should pornography be submitted to the marketplace of ideas? Or should it be censored? On what legal grounds? Which is more important to you, freedom of association or laws banning discrimination? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Religious Freedom Free Exercise: First Amendment clause protecting the free exercise of religion. originally protected individuals only against the national government, and, at the time, only two states, Virginia and Rhode Island, had unqualified religious freedom. free exercise clause: First Amendment clause protecting the free exercise of religion. valid secular purpose: Supreme Court test that allows states to ban activities that infringe on religious practices as long as the state has a nonreligious rationale for prohibiting the behavior. Establishment clause: First Amendment clause prohibiting governmental establishment of religion. Lemon test: Test for determining whether aid to religion violates the establishment clause. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Religious Freedom The Establishment of Religion Congress cannot recognize one official church Establishment clause Lemon test: Test for determining whether aid to religion violates the establ ishment clause. free exercise clause: First Amendment clause protecting the free exercise of religion. valid secular purpose: Supreme Court test that allows states to ban activities that infringe on religious practices as long as the state has a nonreligious rationale for prohibiting the behavior. Establishment clause: First Amendment clause prohibiting governmental establishment of religion. Lemon test: Test for determining whether aid to religion violates the establishment clause. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Religious Freedom Generally, states need only have a valid secular purpose to pass laws that also happen to restrict religious practices. free exercise clause: First Amendment clause protecting the free exercise of religion. valid secular purpose: Supreme Court test that allows states to ban activities that infringe on religious practices as long as the state has a nonreligious rationale for prohibiting the behavior. Establishment clause: First Amendment clause prohibiting governmental establishment of religion. Lemon test: Test for determining whether aid to religion violates the establishment clause. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Religious Freedom In 2014, the Court decided that the Hobby Lobby Corporation, which is owned by a devout Christian, had to abide by the requirement in the Affordable Care Act that its employee health care plan provide free access to birth control pills when the corporate owner believes that such pills can result, not just in the prevention of, but in the termination of pregnancy. Source: Jay Mallin/ZUMAPRESS. com/Alamy Key Questions Should all religions get equal treatment? Can corporations have religious beliefs? If so, can they be required to provide birth control pills that some believe result in the termination of pregnancy to their employees? Should prayers be allowed in school? Under what circumstances? What types of prayers? Is saying a silent prayer the same as wearing an armband? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms
The Second Amendment Opponents of gun rights believe that the well- regulated militia clause limits the right to own a gun. National Firearms Act 1934 Attempt to regulate gun ownership The Supreme Court decided in 2008 that there is an individual right to possess a gun Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms
The Second Amendment Following Sandy Hook School tragedy in 2012 39 bills to tighten access to guns 70 bills easing access to guns But no new significant restrictions were enacted by Congress Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Criminal Procedure Amendments 4, 5, 6, & 7 Investigations
Searches and Seizures Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. The area over which individuals have Fourth Amendment protections are those in which there is an expectation of privacy. Exclusionary Rule: evidence found in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used at trial. In 2014, the Supreme Court found that the content of a cell phone is exempt from police search. expectation of privacy test: Supreme Court test for whether Fourth Amendment protections apply. exclusionary rule: Supreme Court rule declaring that evidence found in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used at trial. Source: AP Images/Matt York Key Questions If the police are tracking your car’s movements, does it matter if they physically touched your car to do so? Why did the first Congress write so many protections regarding criminal procedure into the Bill of Rights?

Criminal Procedure Amendments 4, 5, 6, & 7 Interrogations Fifth Amendment In Miranda v. Arizona, the Court declared that the right against self-incrimination enshrined in the Fifth Amendment applied to the states. expectation of privacy test: Supreme Court test for whether Fourth Amendment protections apply. exclusionary rule: Supreme Court rule declaring that evidence found in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used at trial. Source: AP Images/Matt York Key Questions If the police are tracking your car’s movements, does it matter if they physically touched your car to do so? Why did the first Congress write so many protections regarding criminal procedure into the Bill of Rights? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Criminal Procedure Trial Procedures Verdict, Punishment, and Appeal
Right to counsel (6th): In Gideon v. Wainwright, the Court ruled that all criminals were afforded the right to counsel. Right to impartial jury (7th) Verdict, Punishment, and Appeal Double Jeopardy (5th): ensures that the accused cannot be tried for the same crime again Sentencing: 8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment Appeals

The Right to Privacy Birth Control and Abortion
The Constitutional right inferred by the Court that has been used to protect unlisted rights such as sexual privacy is the right to privacy Right to privacy established in Griswold v. Connecticut: SC voided what one justice called “an uncommonly silly law” that made it a crime for any person—including married couples—to use birth control. 1973 Roe v. Wade Based on right to privacy Established national right to abortion Modifications made in 1992 right to privacy: Constitutional right inferred by the Court that has been used to protect unlisted rights such as sexual privacy and reproductive rights, plus the right to end life-sustaining medical treatment. Roe v. Wade: 1973 Supreme Court case extending the right to privacy to abortion. Key Questions What are the arguments for and against the right of privacy in relation to abortion? What is your opinin? Are you “pro-life” or “pro-choice”? When the people disagree with a Supreme Court decision, what can they do about it?

The Right to Privacy Homosexual Behavior Lawrence v. Texas: SC court ruled that laws prohibiting sodomy were unconstitutional The Right to Die Does not include assisted suicide Student Housing Lawrence v. Texas: 2003 Supreme Court case extending the right to privacy to homosexual behavior. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Civil Liberties and Democracy
Congress and president have ways to hold Supreme Court accountable Unlimited liberties can harm social order Political tolerance essential to democratic stability Political tolerance: Willingness of people to put up with ideas with which they disagree. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Percentage Allowing Speeches by Members of Disfavored Groups 1982-2012
Figure 4.5 The willingness of Americans to allow Communists, atheists, and militarists (those who would do away with elections and have the military run the government) to give speeches has generally increased over the past sixty years. Tolerance toward racists, on the other hand, has slightly decreased. Source: General Social Survey, various years. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Video Discussion Questions
Why did many Muslims find this surveillance offensive? Is it legal? Does American political culture support close scrutiny of religious groups? Do security concerns justify New York’s actions in this case? Why or why not? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Civil liberties Chapter 4.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Civil liberties Chapter 4."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Civil liberties Chapter 4.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Civil liberties Chapter 4."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback