INTERPRETING THE BILL OF RIGHTS

BY SEAN KIGIN

INTERPRETING THE BILL OF RIGHTSBY SEAN KIGIN

What happens when people disagree about our rights under the Constitution?

Consider this example…

• FREEDOM OF THE PRESS means the right to publish newspapers, magazines, and other materials without governmental restriction.

• But do we have the right to print things that are untrue or might endanger someone??

How about this example…

• FREEDOM OF SPEECH means the right to express one’s opinions publicly

But do we have the right to say things that might make people riot or hurt others? And can we say things in public about others that are untrue?

THE ROLE OF THE COURTS

Judges interpret the meaning of citizens’ rights and determine how to apply them in specific situations.

Supreme Court

State/Appellate Courts

Local/District Courts

Usually, cases are first brought before local judges, then may be appealed to State Courts. A few make it all the way to the Supreme Court and have far-reaching consequences.

THE DECISIONS OF THE COURT ARE PRESENTED AS CASE STUDIES

• CASE STUDIES are descriptions of situations or conflicts, the issues involved, and the decisions made.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District - 1965

• Kids decided to protest Viet Nam war by wearing black arm bands to school

• Kids were warned by school not to wear arm bands and were then suspended

• Kids argued that they were not being disruptive and their freedom of speech was being denied

• School said armbands undermined discipline and school was not a place for political demonstrations

UNDERSTANDING THE SUPREME COURT DECISION

• It held that the armbands were a form of “speech” because they were symbols representing ideas.

• The protest was protected under the First Amendment because it had not interfered with the other students’ right to an education.

• Students have a basic right to free speech

ANOTHER CASE…SKOKIE, ILLINOIS v. THE AMERICAN NAZI PARTY - 1977

• American Nazi Party members applied for a permit to march wearing swastikas through the town of Skokie, which had 40,000 Jewish residents.

• The town wanted to prevent the march and said the group would have to buy $350,000 worth of insurance first.

• Nazi Party tried to hold a rally to oppose the insurance requirement and the county court stated they could not hold the protest.

• The county court said they could not wear the uniform, display the swastika, or distribute any material promoting hatred.

• Illinois Supreme Court refused to over-turn the lower court decision.

• The case was appealed to be heard by the US Supreme Court.

SUPREME COURT RULED TO PROTECT FIRST AMMENDMENT RIGHTS, EVEN

EXPRESSIONS OF HATRED

A Jewish member of the American Civil Liberties Union said, “The First Amendment has to be for everyone – or it will be for no one.”

SYMBOLS AS SPEECH

• Already decided by Tinker case that symbols were a form of speech.

• Question was whether the hated swastika symbol would cause a violent reaction, threatening public safety.

• Court concluded that the mere possibility of violence could not keep anyone from exercising the right to freedom of expression.

• The First Amendment protects both popular and unpopular beliefs, making possible a “marketplace of ideas.”