AMERICAN GOVERNMENT WEEK 3 NOTES - CIVIL LIBERTIES
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT WEEK 3 NOTES - CIVIL LIBERTIES 18554
Popular in POLS
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Political Science
This 6 page Class Notes was uploaded by Dwayne Young on Monday February 1, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to 18554 at Georgia State University taught by Dr. Kristina La Plant in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 60 views. For similar materials see POLS in Political Science at Georgia State University.
Reviews for AMERICAN GOVERNMENT WEEK 3 NOTES - CIVIL LIBERTIES
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/01/16
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT 1/26/16 CIVIL LIBERTIES - What are Civil Liberties? The political freedoms that protect individuals from the abuses of power by the government - Where do these liberties com from? Bill of Rights FEDERALIST • States already had a Bill of Rights • Fear of enumeration • The Constitution is a Bill of Rights Believe they needed and internal check on government to make sure they don’t step • on boundaries ANTIFEDERALIST • No Bill of Rights would make federal government too powerful • It would secure individuality Having a constitution meant the government were not as secure holding their civil • liberties • Would hold the federal government accountable for their actions CONGRESS SHOULD MAKE NO LAW… the process by which the bill of rights became applicable to the constitution 1.freedom of speech 2.right to bear arms 3.quarter troops 4.search and seizure 5.due process 6.speedy trial 7.trial by jury 8.cruel and unusual treatment 9.rights not enumerated 10.states rights Whats in the ﬁrst amendment ? ⁃freedom of speech ⁃freedom to assemble ⁃freedom of the press ⁃freedom to petition 1ST AMENDMENT: FREEDOM OF RELIGION ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion CONSITUTIONAL OR UNCONSTITUIONAL ? 1. Schools can require or encourage students to pray before class unconstitutional : Engel V. Vitale 1962 prayer was required before class that didn’t include everyones preference of who they worshipped. 2. A courthouse may display the Nativity Scene: Baby in the manger, jesus and disciples constitutional 3. A courthouse may erect a monument of the 10 commandments constitutional it was a symbol of historical complex, was not representing any particular religion. 4. The government may provide aid to teachers at religious schools who teach secular subjects unconstitutional 5. People may burn the ﬂag of the United States constitutional People may burn the ﬂag of the united states and not be criminalized for it. VIOLATIONS OF RELIGIOUS RIGHTS School Prayer Yes! Religious displays on public property No! Government funding religious schools yes! HOW DO WE INTERPRET THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE? Landmark case… LEMON V. KURTZMAN (1971) 1. have a secular legislative purpose; 2. not have the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion 3. not result in excessive government entanglement with religion What is the test the supreme court uses for establishment laws cases? The Lemon Test HERBERT V. VERNER (1963) Stage 1 The court must ask: Does the person have a claim involving a sincere religious belief? • Does government action pose a substantial burden on the persons ability to act on that belief? Stage 2 If yes, the government must prove; • The government action furthers a “compelling state interest” • The government has taken action that is the least restive or burdensome. HOW FREE IS FREE SPEECH *cases to know* -Brandeburg v. Ohio (1969) -Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) Alien and sedition acts (1798) passed in fear of the french revolution. Effort to maintain the functionality of the government. Schneck v. US (1919) WW1, going around telling people to rip up their draft cards, unconstitutional because he is inciting a revolutionary attitude against the government. Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) students wore black arm bands to protest the Vietnam war, completely constitutional. vvv>THESE CASES, extended ﬁrst amendment rights to corporations<vvv Buckley v. Valeo (1976) congress passed a law to regulate a certain amount of money for contributions, politicians got upset and sued the government. Government said spending money is constitutional when supporting a cause. Burrell v. Hobby Lobby (2014) Obama passed the affordable care act, makes corporation have to pay contraceptives to their employees. Hobby Lobby denied paying, and won the court case. Basically extending the freedom of religion to corporations. PROTECTED V. UNPROTECTED SPEECH: WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE ? Less Protected I. Fighting words I. Defamation Libel Slander Actual Malice I. Obscenity I. Clear-Present Danger Well Protected ⁃Political Speech ⁃Symbolic Speech ⁃Freedom of Assembly MATERIAL CAN BE BANNED IF THE AVERAGE PERSON WOULD FIND THAT 1. It appeals to prurient interests (those associated with sexual desire) 2. It is patently offensive 3. The work as a whole lacks serious literacy, artistic, political or scientiﬁc value SEARCH & SEIZURE CASE: MAPP V. OHIO (1961) • Wife of a heavy weight boxer was rumored to be holding a fugitive that was handing out bonds. Police came to search her house but Mapp claimed they needed a search warrant. Once the policed deemed not to have one, they left the premises and came back minutes later with a convoy of police ofﬁcers. Barging into her house waving a piece of paper in hand. Once police did not ﬁnd anything, they busted her for possession of Pornographic material, which was illegal at the time in Ohio. INTERESTING COURT DECISIONS ON THE FOURTH AMENDMENT ⁃Police cannot use trained dogs to search for narcotics at roadblocks ⁃Public hospitals cannot drug test maternity patients without their consent ⁃Police cannot use thermal imaging to detect “abnormal heat” coming from peoples homes ⁃School ofﬁcials only need “reasonable suspicion” to search a students property. They do not require search warrants. 5th AMENDMENT: KNOW YOUR RIGHTS RIGHTS ⁃Self-incriminating ⁃Double jeopardy ⁃Loss of property LANDMARK CASE Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Ernesto was charged with raping an 18 year old girl, but was was never aware of his rights. He confesses to the crime, however, his lawyers got the case and were aware that he was not aware of his rights. He went on trial again and was sentenced to 30 years, but got out on parole after 5 years. Was seen as local hero, later died in bar ﬁght. 6TH AMENDMENT: FAIR TRIAL Trial by Jury Speedy Trial Right to attorney 8TH AMENDMENT: CRUELAND UNUSUAL PUNISHEMNT ⁃What constitutes as cruel and unusual punishment Hypotheticals ⁃Should minors receive the death penalty for murder ⁃If we consider the death penalty to not be cruel and unusual punishment, then why is it only -Does the existence of the death penalty deter people from committing crimes? 9TH AMENDMENT Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) • • Roe v. wade(1973) • Bowers v. Hardwick(1986) • Lawrence v. Texas(2003) OVERVIEW ⁃Civil liberties are individual protections from government restriction ⁃Federalist were hesitant to include a BoR because of the enumerated problem ⁃Originally the Bill of Rights did NOT apply to state governments -Selective Incorporation is the process by which the BoR became applicable to states -Throughout the selective incorporation process we see state government infringement on a variety of civil liberties including: Freedom of religion • • Due process • Right to privacy -Overall, the Bill of Rights paints a picture of our core civil liberty protections while the supreme court interpretation of those liberties continue to deﬁne the limits of those protections
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'