1. Today’s Agenda  Return and go over Ethics in Journalism exam from last week  Present 1st am. case posters from last week  Revisit Critical Engagement Questions  Freedom of Religion Video: “Football Prayer”  HOMEWORK:  KYCE due Thursday (Alexa)  Any missing assignments? Jake Delhomme is not very good.

2. First Amendment Cases of Note  Schenck v. United States (1919)  Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)  Terminiello v. Chicago (1949)  New York Times v. United States (1971)  United States v. Eichman (1990)  Cantwell v. State of Connecticut (1940)  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)  Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. School Dist. (1969)  Roth v. United States (1957)  Stanley v. Georgia (1969)  Miller v. California (1973) *  Jenkins v. Georgia (1974)

3. Obscenity  One of the most perplexing of all speech-related problems has been the issue of obscenity and what to do about it.  A wide variety of tests have been employed by individual justices to determine what is constitutionally proscribable obscenity, and for long periods of time, no single approach commanded the support of a majority of the Court.  The difficulty of defining obscenity was memorably summarized by Justice Stewart in a concurring opinion when he said: "I know it when I see it."

4. First Amendment Cases of Note  Schenck v. United States (1919)  Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)  Terminiello v. Chicago (1949)  New York Times v. United States (1971)  United States v. Eichman (1990)  Cantwell v. State of Connecticut (1940)  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)  Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. School Dist. (1969)  Roth v. United States (1957)  Stanley v. Georgia (1969)  Miller v. California (1973) *  Jenkins v. Georgia (1974)

5. The "Miller Test" for Obscenity 1. The work in question must depict or describe sexual conduct. 2. The prohibited conduct must be specifically described in the law. 3. The work, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. (the "SLAPS" test) 4. The work, taken as a whole and applying contemporary community standards, must appeal to prurient interest in sex. 5. The work must portray sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, applying contemporary community standards.

6. Critical Engagement Questions  Are all forms of speech protected?  How is our society shaped by the First Amendment?  Do First Amendment "rules" change depending on the situation?  Have court interpretations of the First Amendment changed over time?  How will new technologies affect the First Amendment?