The First Amendment is probably one of the most used and controversial amendments in the whole Constitution. 
From debates on what is considered hate speech to how far the freedom of religion goes, there have been lots of disagreements on the rights that this amendment provides us with. Regardless, it is one of the more crucial parts of American society and is the foundation for the rest of the Constitution.
The First Amendment states that “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.” In simpler terms, it guarantees us the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. Some of these may be a little more complicated than others so let's talk a little more about what each of these freedoms actually means.
Freedom of religion means that anyone in the United States has the right to practice whatever religion you wish or no religion at all. This freedom also prohibits that government from promoting any one religion in any way, which is why the United States does not have an official religion. You also can not be penalized for supporting or believing in a specific religion.
One real-world example of when this freedom was taken away from someone is Torcaso v. Watkins. Roy R. Torcaso was a candidate for public office in Maryland but was denied the position because he was not willing to declare that he believed in God. At the time, this was required by the Maryland state constitution. Torcaso sued the state of Maryland and this case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, where it reached a unanimous decision in favor of Torcaso.
Freedom of speech is defined as “the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint.” Now, this doesn’t mean that you can go around saying whatever you want with no filter. There are some things that don’t fall under what is legal with this freedom, one of them being threats. You can’t threaten someone with physical harm and then justify that with your right to freedom of speech. Not only does freedom of speech include your right to speak, but also has to do with your right not to speak. One specific example of this is West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, which specifically deals with your right to not salute the flag. Some background information about this case— Walter Barnette sued the West Virginia Board of Education because they required schools to have the children salute the flag and if they did not comply with these rules, they would risk expulsion. This was considered as a violation of their freedom of speech and religion. Barnette ended up winning his case and shortly after this law was overturned.
Freedom of press is defined as “the right of newspapers, magazines, etc, to report news without being controlled by the government.” This allows writers to write whatever they want to without the fear of getting censored by the government. Now, like most of these laws, there are some basic restrictions that come with this freedom. Any content that contains slander, obscenity, trade secrets, and many other regulations can be taken down. The purpose of this part of the First Amendment is not to allow people to spread negative or obscene content but rather to be allowed to put their own opinions on the internet without having them taken down. This also allows people to read and learn about all sides of a story instead of just one part of it from the government. One famous example of a court case that involved both the freedom of press and an individual’s right to privacy was Barber v. Time. In 1939, Dorothy Barber sued Time magazine for writing an article with a picture of her without her approval. In order to truly understand what happened, you need to know more about this case. Barber has checked herself into a hospital because she wanted to receive treatment for an eating disorder she has which allowed her to eat massive amounts of food without gaining weight. Time had published a story a week later titled “Starving Glutton” and included a picture of Barber in the hospital. She hadn’t given consent for the article or the picture and sued Time for invading her privacy. She won her case and her case provides a great example on how these rights and freedoms can be exploited.
These next two parts of the First Amendment are a little more confusing than the previous ones. The dictionary definition of freedom of assembly is “the right to hold public meetings and form associations without interference by the government.” Now, what exactly does this mean? This means that you have the right to gather in groups for peaceful intentions. This could mean rallies, marches, assemblies, or even private meetings. The freedom of assembly is important because it allows people to come together to express their opinions. Now, like all of the previous freedoms, there are restrictions that come with this. Some possible restrictions that could come with a group of people who gather to peacefully protest could be limits on the size of the groups, limits on the location, or prohibiting certain demonstrations. If these restrictions are not followed, the government may have to use force in order to break up these protests. One very controversial court case involving the freedom of assembly is National Socialist Party of America v. Skokie. The National Socialist Party of America (NSPA) was a neo-Nazi group who wanted to rally in Skokie. This town had a large population of Jewish people and Holocaust survivors and this rally would include people wearing uniforms similar to those worn by Nazis. The NSPA used to regularly hold demonstrations in Marquette Park but that was no longer possible once the Chicago police required them to post a $350,000 bond. Frank Collin, the leader of the NSPA, filed a lawsuit against the police but was not willing to wait for this to settle before he got to march again. This case moved up all the way to the Supreme Court, where it was decided that the NSPA could march, but could not display the swastika during their march as it was not protected by the First Amendment. This case highlighted the need to address hate speech and promote inclusivity and while this case did not directly create more laws restricting hate speech, it did start many conversations about how far the freedom of speech and assembly really go.
The final part of the First Amendment is the freedom of petition. It allows us to ask the government to change a decision that we don’t agree with. What this means is that people have the right to go to the government with any complaints or concerns and to ask for those to be addressed. This right does not guarantee that the government will take the exact course of action that you wished for, but it does guarantee that they will at least take into consideration the concerns of their citizens and provide some sort of response, whether it be in favor of the citizens request or not. One court case that has to deal with the freedom of petition is the Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri. This case involves Charles Guarnieri, who was a police officer in the Borough of Duryea. He was not happy with how he was being treated by his superiors and filed multiple grievances and sued the Borough. At first, this did not go as he wanted and he ended up getting disciplined at work but eventually, this case went up to the Supreme Court, who ruled in Guarnieri’s favor since he was within his rights to petition for a redress of grievances.
To summarize what has been said, the First Amendment is a vital part of our government and guarantees Americans many rights, including the freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition. Hopefully after reading this article you know more about each one of those and understand how while they may seem straightforward, there are actually many layers to each of them. If you learned something new from this article and want to keep expanding your knowledge of the American government, be sure to check out the next article, where we will dive into the amendment that has caused many debates recently. Hint-it allows you to carry guns.
Freedom of press is defined as “the right of newspapers, magazines, etc, to report news without being controlled by the government.” This allows writers to write whatever they want to without the fear of getting censored by the government. Now, like most of these laws, there are some basic restrictions that come with this freedom. Any content that contains slander, obscenity, trade secrets, and many other regulations can be taken down. The purpose of this part of the First Amendment is not to allow people to spread negative or obscene content but rather to be allowed to put their own opinions on the internet without having them taken down. This also allows people to read and learn about all sides of a story instead of just one part of it from the government. One famous example of a court case that involved both the freedom of press and an individual’s right to privacy was Barber v. Time. In 1939, Dorothy Barber sued Time magazine for writing an article with a picture of her without her approval. In order to truly understand what happened, you need to know more about this case. Barber has checked herself into a hospital because she wanted to receive treatment for an eating disorder she has which allowed her to eat massive amounts of food without gaining weight. Time had published a story a week later titled “Starving Glutton” and included a picture of Barber in the hospital. She hadn’t given consent for the article or the picture and sued Time for invading her privacy. She won her case and her case provides a great example on how these rights and freedoms can be exploited.
Comments
Post a Comment