Homework: Study for your test Friday/Monday

FrontPage: Why is the freedom of the press important in a democracy?

Snyder vs. Phelps

Does the First Amendment protect protesters at a funeral from liability for intentionally inflicting emotional distress on the family of the deceased?

Yes. In an opinion by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. The Court held that the First Amendment shields those who stage a protest at the funeral for a military service member from liability. "Whether the First Amendment prohibits holding Westboro liable for its

speech in this case turns largely on whether that speech is of public or private concern." And in this specific case, the judges determined, the words on Westboro's signs indeed dealt with "matters of public import" and are thus protected by the First Amendment. The signs highlight issues like "the political and moral conduct of the United States and its citizens, the fate of our Nation, homosexuality in the military, and scandals involving the Catholic clergy."

Morse vs. Frederick

At a school-supervised event, Joseph Frederick held up a banner with the message "Bong Hits 4 Jesus," a slang reference to marijuana smoking. Principal Deborah Morse took away the banner and suspended

Frederick for ten days. She justified her actions by citing the school's policy against the display of material that promotes the use of illegal drugs

The District Court found no constitutional violation and ruled in favor of Morse. The court held that even if there were a violation, the principal

had qualified immunity from lawsuit. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed.

Citing Tinker, because Frederick was punished for his message rather than for any disturbance, the Circuit Court ruled, the punishment was unconstitutional.

Does the 1st amendment permit schools to restrict speech dealing with drug use? Yes. The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit by a 5-4 vote, ruling that school

officials can prohibit students from displaying messages that promote illegal drug use. Chief Justice John Roberts's majority opinion held that although students do have some right to political speech even while in school, this right does not extend to pro-drug messages that may undermine the school's important mission to discourage drug use. The majority held that Frederick's message, though "cryptic," was reasonably interpreted as promoting marijuana use - equivalent to "[Take] bong hits" or "bong hits [are a good thing]." In ruling for Morse, the Court affirmed that the speech rights of public school students are not as extensive as those adults normally enjoy, and that the highly protective standard set by Tinker would not always be applied. In concurring opinions, Justice Thomas expressed his view that the right to free speech does not apply to students and his wish to see Tinker overturned altogether, while Justice Alito stressed that the decision applied only to pro-drug messages and not to broader political speech. The dissent conceded that the principal should have had immunity from the lawsuit, but argued that the majority opinion was "[...] deaf to the constitutional imperative to permit unfettered debate, even among high-school students [...]."

FREEDOM OF THE PRESSThe Right To Know vs. The Right to “No”

In the First 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;

**What is “the press”? - All forms of publication that are a means of

conveying information and opinions. What other word might we use today to describe

“the press”?Examples?

What does “freedom of the press” really mean?

Just as there are many forms of “the press”, there are many different ideas about what this phrase could mean…

Could it mean… A publisher cannot refuse to print your ideas if you submit

them? Journalists do not have to identify their sources of information? The government must provide the appropriate tools so that

anyone can publish their ideas if they cannot afford to? The press can be forced to provide equal time (or space) to

all sides in a debate? You can publish the work of another person without their

permission? The government cannot prevent the publication of any

information?

Worldwide Press Freedom According to WorldAudit.org, the US is

11th in terms of press freedom Some notable rankings:Finland 1

Denmark 2

Sweden 3

India 49

Mexico 68

Egypt 92

China 135

**How does “the press” function today?

Provides information to the public Provides a forum for the exchange of

ideas and debate

Homework: Test tomorrow/Monday

FrontPage: In what situations might the freedom of the press need to be limited?

Saturday Night Live “War Briefing” Parody

Again, the question we must ask is,

“How much freedom can the press exercise?

1st Amendment protection for different types of media…

Highest: Print media Includes the internet

Movies Radio and TV

Cable TV perhaps a bit more… Obscenity in general

Based on “community standards”

Shaping the Freedom of the Press: The Supreme Court

The Court must balance 2 needs when considering how much freedom the press can exercise…

 The public’s “Right to know”  

vs.

Gov’t (or an individual’s) need for secrecy/privacy

How can the government infringe on the freedom of the Press?

Prior restraint – government censorship of material before it can be published; or government/courts preventing the reporting of information

- Allowed only in certain circumstances Will cause serious/irreparable harm No other course/action would prevent the harm

Significant Supreme Court cases

Near vs. Minnesota Held that prior restraint is unconstitutional; incorporated this part of

the First Amendment New York Times vs. Sullivan

Established the “actual malice” standard which has to be met before press reports can be considered to be defamation and libel

The actual malice standard requires that the plaintiff prove that the publisher of the statement knew that the statement was false or acted in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity.

Because of the extremely high burden of proof on the plaintiff, and the difficulty in proving essentially what is inside a person's head, such cases—when they involve public figures—rarely prevail.

New York Times vs. US Pentagon Papers case: US could not prevent publication of

confidential military documents