1. U. S. Supreme Court MINERSVILLE SCHOOL DIST. v. GOBITIS, 310 U. S

2. FACTS: Lillian Gobitis, aged twelve, and her brother William, aged ten, were expelled from the public schools of Minersville, Pennsylvania, for refusing to salute the national flag as part of a daily school exercise.

3. The Gobitis children were of an age for which Pennsylvania makes school attendance compulsory.

4. Legal issue Did the mandatory flag salute infringe upon liberties protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?

5. Article [I] (Amendment 1 - Freedom of expression and religion) 13
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

6. Amendment 14 - Rights Guaranteed: Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process, and Equal Protection
1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

7. Decision
The Court ruled that public schools could compel students—in this case, Jehovah's Witnesses—to salute the American Flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance despite the students' religious objections to these practices.

8. WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION v. BARNETTE, 319 U. S

9. The facts and the issue were similar Did the compulsory flag-salute for public schoolchildren violate the First Amendment?

10. Decision: In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court overruled its decision in Minersville School District v. Gobitis and held that compelling public schoolchildren to salute the flag was unconstitutional.

11. Reason: The Court found that such a salute was a form of utterance and was a means of communicating ideas

12. A judge said: “Compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard.”

13. CANTWELL v. STATE OF CONNECTICUT, 310 U.S. 296 (1940)

14. Facts: The Cantwells distributed religious materials by travelling door-to-door and by approaching people on the street. After voluntarily hearing an anti-Roman Catholic message on the Cantwells' portable phonograph, two pedestrians reacted angrily.

15. The Cantwells were subsequently arrested for violating a local ordinance requiring a permit for solicitation and for inciting a breach of the peace.

16. Legal issue: Did the solicitation statute or the "breach of the peace" ordinance violate the Cantwells' First Amendment free speech or free exercise rights?

17. Decision and the Reason The Court also held that while the maintenance of public order was a valid state interest, it could not be used to justify the suppression of "free communication of views."

18. Opinion: “The wisdom of training children in patriotic impulses by those compulsions which necessarily pervade so much of the educational process is not for judges’ independent judgment.”

19. Opinion The U.S. Court infringes on the legislative powers.
The U.S. Court does not have clear standards to protect the rights