1st Amendment: 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 (injustice). 4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probably cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. I. Military Funeral Protest Case A. Westboro Baptist Church condemns America for its acceptance of homosexuality, particularly now in war. 1. They show up at funerals and protest against homosexuality. B. Margie Phelps, the respondent believes that the court will not allow ones outrage, offense, and annoyance to censor the speech protected by the First Amendment. She believes this is unconstitutional. C. 21 media organizations including the NYT, Associated Press, and NPR wrote letters supporting Phelps constitutional rights. D. FINAL DECISION: The first amendment protects WBCs actions in protesting against homosexuality, including their freedom of speech and right to peaceably assemble. Churchs Quran-Burning Pledge A. Pastor Jones and his church wanted to burn copies of the Quran because he believed that Islam was a malevolent religion. B. General David Petraeus, the leading general in Afghanistan, believes that the American soldiers will likely be at risk. C. Case Process: 1. Government v Jones (local): Local court ruled the Quran burning illegal because of a Florida state law that ruled against it. Jones and his church were fined. 2. Jones v Government (state): State court ruled in favor of the government again because of the same Florida state law. 3. Jones v Government (nationa): Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jones and his church because of first amendment. D. FINAL DECISION: Quran-burning is protected by the first amendment because it would be difficult for the government to prove direct link between book burning and possible Islamic violence. Quran-burning is part of freedom of expression Miranda v Arizona (1966) A. Ernesto Miranda, accused of kidnapping and rape, was arrested and questioned by police. B. He confessed to the crime, but the police had not informed him of his 5th Amendment rights (right to remain silent) and his 6th amendment rights (right to counsel) C. FINAL DECISION: Supreme Court agreed that the police had not taken proper steps to inform Miranda and that he was innocent. Texas v Johnson (1989) A. In protest of the Reagan Administration, Gregory Lee Johnson burned the American flag B. Nobody was hurt but many were offended. Johnson was charged with burning a venerable object.

II.

III.

IV.

C. FINAL DECISION: Supreme Court agreed that Johnsons actions were freedom of expression protected by the first amendment. V. Tinker v Des Moines (1969) A. The Tinker family wore black armbands to their public school as a symbol of protest against the Vietnam War. B. They refused to remove them and were suspended. C. FINAL DECISION: Tinkers had the right to wear the armbands because schools should not limit their constitutional rights of freedom of expression. VI. Marbury v Madison (1803) VII. Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier (1988) A. Hazelwood East HS Principal Robert Reynolds censored insensitive content that was going to be published in the school newspaper. B. Journalism students felt that this censorship violated their First Amendment rights C. FINAL DECISION: Supreme Court deemed it right for Reynolds to make such censorships to make sure speech was appropriate. VIII. New Jersey v T.L.O. (1985) A. A NJ HS student was accused of smoking in the bathroom, so an Assistant Principal searched her purse for cigarettes. B. The student justified that possession of cigarettes is not a violation of school rules, and therefore did not justify the search. C. FINAL DECISION: Supreme Court decided that the search did not violate the rights of searches in the Constitution. IX. Mapp v Ohio (1961) A. Dollree Mapp was accused of hiding a person who was suspected in a bombing, so the police seeked a search of her house. Mapp didnt allow them because they didnt have a warrant. B. In an illegal search, they found pornographic materials, a violation of Ohio law. Mapp was found guilty and sent to jail. She repealed her case to the Ohio Supreme Court, but still lost. C. FINAL DECISION: The U.S. Supreme Court determined that the evidence obtained through the illegal search was inadmissible. It was a violation of the 4th amendment, right against unreasonable searches. X. Morse v Frederick (2007) A. HS principal Deborah Morse suspended 18-year-old Joseph Frederick after he displayed a banner reading bong hits 4 Jesus. B. Frederick sued, claiming his rights to free speech were violated. C. FINAL DECISION: Supreme Court ruled that the first amendment does not prevent educators from censoring student speech at a school-supervised event, which was encouraging illegal drug use. XI. Schenck v U.S. (1919) A. Charles Schenck was the Secretary of the Socialist Party of America and was responsible for advertising to draftees not to join the World War I effort. B. He was convicted for violating the Espoinage Act of 1917. He appealed to the Supreme Court that the court decision violated his first amendment rights. C. FINAL DECISION: Schencks criticism of the draft was not protected by the First Amendment because it created a danger to the enlistment and recruiting practices of the US military, which wasnt allowed.