Term
|
Definition
| punished people who crticized the crown whether info was true or not. |
|
|
Term
| The press had obtain a license |
|
Definition
| this was a type of prior restraint. They also had to have approval of everything they printed before it was printed |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Another form of restraint that the English crown used. Printers had to deposit large sums of money. They didn't get the money back if the government felt that the material should not have been published to begin with. Then he had to post another bond before he could start printing again. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the crown offered printers monopolies and/or patents to some in exchange for them only printing acceptable stuff and helping the crown get rid of printers who broke the publication laws. |
|
|
Term
| In the most famous case of government censorship, the seditious libel case of Peter Zenger, what happened? |
|
Definition
| Zenger printed an article that truthfully criticized the government and went to jail for it. The Court decided to let him go and said that no one should get in trouble if the criticizim is in fact true. It was known as JURY NULLIFICATION |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The power of the jury to ignore a law and come up with a verdict aside from the law. Example : the Peter Zenger Trial |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| People were allowed to express their ideas freely but for their own safety they kept their ideas to themselves unless they knew the other people agreed. They did this for their own safety this was know as the Chilling Effect it is a typ of self-censorship |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The crowd doesn't agree with something and therefore prevents the speaker from speaking. (boo-ing people off stage) |
|
|
Term
Filmmaker Micheal Moore
California State University |
|
Definition
| Farenheight 9/11- University said he cannot speak here cuz it is an election year and his speech may create a partisan appearance. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| We're ashamed our president is from Texas= Music was then banned |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| 1. No Law!(can go against someones rights) Gov't cannot censor the press for ANY reason absolutely not! (this doesn't apply to fighting words, child porn, etc.) |
|
|
Term
| What are the 7 first amendment theories? (used as strategies to help judges develop a practical definition of freedom of expression) |
|
Definition
1. Absolutist theory
2. Ad hoc Balancing Theory
3. Prefferd position thoery
4. Meiklejohnian Theory
5. Market place of Ideas
6. Access Theory
7. Self-realization/ Self-fulfillment Theory- |
|
|
Term
| Ad hoc balancing Theory (more of a strategy) |
|
Definition
(Can be based on Judge bias)
The freedom of expression is determined on a case-by-case basis.
(Ex: freedom of press and secrecy of the military- it must be balanced)
Protect health, safety of the community |
|
|
Term
| Preferred Position Balancing Theory |
|
Definition
DOMINANT UNANIMOUS THEORY, puts pressure on gov't.
Gives the freedom of expression a preffered position. (Gov't action that limits free speech and press to protect other rights is generally unconstitutional.) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| forbade false publications againts the Gov't, congress, and the president |
|
|
Term
| How many justices make up the Supreme Court? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Meiklejohnian theory. pg. 45 |
|
Definition
Self-governing
purports to protect and uphold all self-governing speech which is necessary for democracY.
Divides into 2 groups.
1. Public speech (self-governance)
2. Private Speech- speech between us- can be regulated. |
|
|
Term
| Marketplace of Ideas Theory pg 46 |
|
Definition
**Discovery of the truth**
(making them print something) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the court rejected the access theory during the Miami Herald Vs. Tornillo case |
|
|
Term
| Self-realization/ self-fulfillment Theory |
|
Definition
Speech is important to the person regardless of who acknowledges it or the impact it has on others. Ex: writing in a diary is only helful to the person writing it.
- YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT CUZ YOU ARE TRYING TO "FIND YOUSELF" |
|
|
Term
| Determining if an individual may be punished for advocating a violent overthrow of the government would likely hinge upon whether such advocacy is: |
|
Definition
| Intended to produce imminent lawless action (e.g. violent overthrow of government) and likely to produce such action. |
|
|
Term
| The access theory of free speech can be seen as a remedy for correcting flaws in which other theory of free speech |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Near v. Minnesota (1931) is a landmark ruling because the Supreme Court determined: |
|
Definition
| The government may exercise prior restraint, specifically when the nation is at war or the material in question is obscene or incites violence. |
|
|
Term
| Can state and federal governments constitutionally tax newspapers and other press outlets? |
|
Definition
Yes, if it is a tax that applies to everyone/all businesses.
Yes, if the tax is evenly applied to all outlets in one medium |
|
|
Term
| Prior restraints may be allowed if: |
|
Definition
There is a significant national security interest.
The expression restrained falls outside the protection of the First Amendment. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| it is a crime to conspire a violent overthrow of government |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court didn't violate Whitneys rights |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| The theory of the First Amendment that purports to protect and uphold all self-governing speech which is necessary for democracy is known as the: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| The clear and present danger test articulated by Justice Holmes in Schenck v. U.S. (1919): |
|
Definition
| Failed to overturn lower-court sedition convictions. |
|
|
Term
| The clear and present danger test articulated by Justice Brandeis in Whitney v. California (1927): |
|
Definition
Protected more speech than Holmes' version as described in Schenck v. U.S. (1919) .
B) Helped influence and shape the eventual Brandenburg test.
C) Never appeared in a majority opinion concerning sedition. |
|
|
Term
| Which legal test is used by courts to determine the fate of wrongful death and negligence claims that are levied against a specific book, record, or film? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Given existing case law, successfully holding the media responsible for someone else's illegal conduct is: |
|
Definition
| Nearly impossible and rare. |
|
|
Term
| Upon reviewing its initial decision in Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists (2002), how did the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rule regarding whether the First Amendment protects an anti-abortion activist website that referred to abortion physicians as "baby butchers" and struck out the names of such doctors who had been murdered? |
|
Definition
| The First Amendment did not protect the web postings because they were found to directly threaten both abortion physicians and patients. |
|
|
Term
| A primary goal of free speech under the marketplace of ideas metaphor is: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Determining if an individual may be punished for advocating a violent overthrow of the government would likely hinge upon whether such advocacy is: |
|
Definition
| Intended to produce imminent lawless action (e.g. violent overthrow of government) and likely to produce such action. |
|
|
Term
| Gitlow v. New York (1925) is an important case for all Americans because: |
|
Definition
| The Supreme Court determined the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to adhere to the fundamental liberties guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. |
|
|
Term
| Grosjean v. American Press Co. (1936) is a significant precedent because the Supreme Court ruled that: |
|
Definition
| The First Amendment protects the press from being burdened with taxes that are levied in a discriminatory manner. |
|
|
Term
| Courts that have considered legislation limiting minors' access to video games depicting violent images have: |
|
Definition
| Struck down the laws for violating the First Amendment right of free speech. |
|
|
Term
| The access theory of free speech can be seen as a remedy for correcting flaws in which other theory of free speech? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Near v. Minnesota (1931) is a landmark ruling because the Supreme Court determined: |
|
Definition
| The government may exercise prior restraint, specifically when the nation is at war or the material in question is obscene or incites violence. |
|
|
Term
| In Austin v. Keefe (1971), the Supreme Court determined that an injunction prohibiting the distribution of pamphlets: |
|
Definition
| Consisted a prior restraint in violation of the First Amendment. |
|
|
Term
| The Pentagon Papers case resulted in: |
|
Definition
| A minor victory for the press, for it did little legally to strengthen First Amendment protections. |
|
|
