1. Civil Liberties: The First Amendment and Privacy

2. Admin Film on Friday – “The Interrogation of Michael Crowe”
Alternative showing next week?
Worksheet is a guide, not an assignment
No office hours tomorrow
Homework due Monday (as scheduled)

3. Freedom of Speech and Press
Bad Tendency (- 1919)
Clear and Present Danger Doctrine
Fighting Words (1942 – 1951)
Balancing Doctrine (1951 – 1960s)
In each case [courts] must ask whether the gravity of the "evil," discounted by its improbability, justifies such invasion of free speech as necessary to avoid the danger
FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS DOCTRINE
Why??
Clear and Present Danger – Schenck v. U.S. (1919), Schenck was a socialist who encouraged burning of draft cards, convicted under the Espionage Act, conviction upheld – Holmes – “no right to falsely cry “fire” in a crowded theater”
Fighting Words doctrine expanded the types of speech that could be regulated under CPD – Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942) – Chaplinsky asked a police officer to protect him from people angry with his pacifist rhetoric, officer refused, Chaplinsky called him a God damned racketeer and a damned fascist, was arrested for breach of peace
Balancing Doctrine further expanded the type of speech that could be regulated under CPD, McCarthy hearings, Dennis v. U.S. (1951), conviction of 11 leaders of communist party for violation of Smith Act, conviction upheld, balance between speech and government interest in resisting subversion.
Douglas Dissent: “So far as the present record is concerned, what petitioners did was to organize people to teach and themselves teach the Marxist-Leninist doctrine contained chiefly in four books The opinion of the Court does not outlaw these texts nor condemn them to the fire, as the Communists do literature offensive to their creed. But if the books themselves are not outlawed, if they can lawfully remain on library shelves, by what reasoning does their use in a classroom become a crime? It would not be a crime under the Act to introduce these books to a class, though that would be teaching what the creed of violent overthrow of the Government is. The Act, as construed, requires the element of intent - that those who teach the creed believe in it. The crime then depends not on what is taught but on who the teacher is. That is to make freedom of speech turn not on what is said, but on the intent with which it is said. Once we start down that road we enter territory dangerous to the liberties of every citizen.”

4. Freedom of Speech and Press: What Is Protected?
Political speech
Artistic expression
“Speech plus”
Symbolic speech/expression

5. Doctrine of Prior Restraint
Government cannot prevent press from publishing material
Applies even if publication can ultimately be punished
Why?

6. What Is NOT Protected? Libel and Slander
Allow damages for false statements that harm someone’s reputation
Public figures must show “actual malice”
Obscenity – defined by community standards
Appeals to prurient interest
Patently offensive
No literary, artistic, political or scientific value

7. Less Protected Speech Speech by students, especially pre-college
Commercial speech (advertising)

8. Privacy Hints in the 30s, 40s, and 50s Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
“Zone of privacy” in 3rd, 4th, and 5th Amendments
9th Amendment
Abortion and Roe v. Wade (1973)
Sodomy Laws and Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Right to Die?