1. The Supreme Court Interprets the First Amendment
You be the JUDGE
The Supreme Court Interprets
the First Amendment

4. Is it Libel?
The New York Times printed an ad from a Civil Rights group. The ad was highly critical of the way some public officials had been treating Dr. Martin Luther King and others.
Some of the statements in the ad were not correct – for example, it said Dr. King has been arrested by Alabama police 7 times; in fact, he had been arrested 4 times.
The Montgomery, Alabama police commissioner claimed the Times had committed libel against him.
Vote “Thumbs-Up” if you think the police commissioner had been libeled by the Times.

5. This is the famous case of
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964).
The Supreme Court said the police commissioner (Sullivan) is a public official, and public officials should expect to receive criticism.
Because of this case, it is very difficult for public officials (and celebrities) to sue for libel.

7. A religious objection to a license tag
George Maynard said he’d rather give up his freedom than his life, and that the “Live Free or Die” motto on the New Hampshire license plates violated his Jehova’s Witness religious beliefs. It’s against the law to cover up any part of your license plate, and Mr. Maynard got a ticket for covering the state motto on license tag. He took his appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court.
Vote ”Thumbs-Up” if you think he should be allowed to violate the state law and put tape over ”Live Free or Die.”

8. In a 6-3 decision in the case of
Wooley v Maynard (1977) , the US Supreme Court said the state may not require Mr. Maynard to display a motto that is contrary to his moral and religious beliefs.

10. Freedom of the Press?
In Jacksonville, the Florida Star newspaper accidentally printed the name of a rape victim, in violation of both Florida law and the paper’s own policy.
The woman sued, and won $100,000 in damages.
The newspaper appealed to the US Supreme Court on the grounds that the Florida law against publishing the name of a rape victim is unconstitutional.
Vote “Thumbs-up” if you vote for the woman and against the newspaper.

11. In the case of Florida Star vs BJF (1989), the US Supreme Court
declared Florida’s law unconstitutional,
which overturned the ruling of lower courts that awarded the woman $100,000.
The Florida law made it illegal to publish the name of a victim of a sex crime, but the Supreme Court said it’s a violation of the First Amendment to prohibit the publishing of truthful public information.
BTW, the victim’s name should have been removed from the copy of the police report that was made available to the news media. The Sheriff’s Office had accidentally violated a state law and its own policy by failing to remove the name. The Sheriff’s Office settled with the woman, paying her $2,500 for their mistake (she got to keep that money).

13. Freedom of Religion?
In Pennsylvania, the Native American parents of a girl named Little Bird of the Snow refused to register their daughter for a Social Security Number because of their religious beliefs.
Pennsylvania requires a Social Security Number for all persons receiving food stamps. The parents said the state should pay benefits without using a Social Security Number.
Vote “Thumbs-Up” if you vote to allow the family to receive full benefits without an SSN for Little Bird of the Snow.

14. No, the State of Pennsylvania does not have to pay food stamp benefits for someone who refuses to use a social security number, even if they refuse for religious purposes.
The First Amendment says the government cannot force any religious beliefs on citizens, but that’s not what was happening in this case.
Instead, citizens were trying to get the government to change its procedures because of their family’s own religious beliefs.
Bowen v. Roy (1986)

16. Must the University Support a Religious Magazine?
The University of Virginia had a policy of providing funds to student publications that met certain guidelines, but it said supporting a religious magazine would violate the First Amendment’s “Establishment Clause.”
The student-published magazine Wide Awake applied for its share of the funding, but was turned down because it was a “magazine of philosophical and religious expression."
Vote Thumbs-Up if you believe the university should be required to support Wide Awake in the same manner it supports other student publications.

17. Wide Awake was entitled to funding just like any other student publication, if it met the guidelines.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in the case of
Rosenberger v University of Virginia (1995).

19. Does Freedom of Speech go that Far?
In 2006, Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder died in Iraq. When his funeral was held in Maryland, a protest group waved signs such as “America is Doomed,” “God Hates You,” and “Thank God for Dead Soldiers.” The protesters’ website said Cpl. Snyder’s parents “raised him for the devil,” and “taught him God was a liar,” because they brought him up in the Roman Catholic church. Cpl. Snyder’s father sued the protesters.
Vote “Thumbs-Up” if you agree with Cpl. Snyder’s father that the protesters went too far to be protected by the First Amendment.

20. With just one of the nine Justices dissenting, the US Supreme Court decision in the case of Snyder v Phelps (2011) illustrates the First Amendment protects even speech that almost everybody considers “offensive” and “outrageous.”