New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Comm Law Week 4

Star Star Star Star Star
1 review
by: Jazmyn D Matthews

Comm Law Week 4 JRLC 5040

Jazmyn D Matthews
View Full Document for 0 Karma

View Full Document


Unlock These Notes for FREE

Enter your email below and we will instantly email you these Notes for Communication Law

(Limited time offer)

Unlock Notes

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Unlock FREE Class Notes

Enter your email below to receive Communication Law notes

Everyone needs better class notes. Enter your email and we will send you notes for this class for free.

Unlock FREE notes

About this Document

Communication Law notes. This is the last full week of notes before the exam on the 12th.
Communication Law
Professor Middleton
Class Notes
Comm law, Communication Law, Middleton, journalism, Law, uga, University of Georgia




Star Star Star Star Star
1 review
Star Star Star Star Star
"If Jazmyn isn't already a tutor, they should be. Haven't had any of this stuff explained to me as clearly as this was. I appreciate the help!"
Quentin Kiehn

Popular in Communication Law

Popular in Journalism and Mass Communications

This 6 page Class Notes was uploaded by Jazmyn D Matthews on Friday February 5, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to JRLC 5040 at University of Georgia taught by Professor Middleton in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 43 views. For similar materials see Communication Law in Journalism and Mass Communications at University of Georgia.

Similar to JRLC 5040 at UGA

Popular in Journalism and Mass Communications


Reviews for Comm Law Week 4

Star Star Star Star Star

If Jazmyn isn't already a tutor, they should be. Haven't had any of this stuff explained to me as clearly as this was. I appreciate the help!

-Quentin Kiehn


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: 02/05/16
2/1/16  Displaying a Bible verse at a Texas high school football game o The principle can not because he’s a government official o Student can, wouldn’t be infringing on anyone’s rights  Can the city of Charleston tell tour guides that they have to pay $45 to pass a content test on Charleston before they become a licensed tour guide? o Reference licensing speech  It’s unconstitutional to punish someone for saying that they won a medal that they didn’t and for wearing a medal that they didn’t earn; the Constitution protects falsity  Strict scrutiny o Brought out when things are deemed “content-based”; if it’s not, this doesn’t apply. o Must have a compelling interest o Must also be narrowly drawn  Texas used this as a compelling interesting when gaining a compelling interesting in the flag burning case; they brought up patriotism, more of a “love your country” type of thing o Hierarchy of Protected Expression  “All speech is protected equally” is false statement; there are some things that are definitely more protected than others  Holding up Bible verses at a football game was deemed political speech- the most protected; as long as they weren’t obstructing anyone’s views or interefering with the game, it’s fine  Commercial speech is the next most protected  Nude dancing is protected  Government can regulate commercial speech without a compelling interest  What’s not protected is false advertising, fraud, obscenity (narrow category), fighting words, and true threats  A lot of hate speech is protected until it becomes fighting words and/or true threats  Fighting Words  Must be done in person and in range where someone can be harmed  “Direct tendency to cause acts of violence”  If someone passed by a policeman and yelled “You bastard” outside their window towards policeman and is later arrested for it, those are not fighting words  The words weren’t directed at his face so they aren’t fighting words  If someone calls a policeman a facist and/or a racketeer and is arrested for fighting words  The conviction was upheld  Wearing ‘F” the draft… is it deemed fighting words?  R.A.V v. City of St. Paul  Can’t be punished for fighting words in this case because it wasn’t a constitutional ordinance  The ordinance punished people for swastikas, graffiti, burning cross and anything that was likely to arouse “anger, alarm, resentment” on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, or gender  If they are to be punished, punish them for something else but fighting words isn’t the category  Unfortunately, this ordinance builds a tolerance for certain kinds of speech  Same with the man on the radio saying “the blacks are getting too much power” o He could be punished for other things but not for his speech because the statute was unconstitutional  Failed scrutiny because with it was unconstitutional content discrimination o Cross burning can only be punished if it portends violence  People selling Nazi memorabilia is illegal in Germany but not in the US.  The speech was protected in the US so they couldn’t punish it on a foreign speech law  There is no conviction on fighting words if the statute or ordinance is based on content discrimination  True Threats  It has the intent to intimidate, and that’s exactly what it does  Elonis V. United States  Terrorized his wife on Facebook with rude comments  You had to look at his history to make the call – Did he have a violent history? He had to have shown an intent to intimidate and the SC sent the case back so the lower court could determine if there was in fact intimidation on his part  They don’t necessarily have to show intent to follow through  U.S. v. Jeffries  “Daughter’s Love”  Threatened the judge  It was argued that the judge was not named but he was identified  They were considered true threats  Clemmons Tumblr post  Sat in jail because he couldn’t make bail  He was convicted of making a terroristic threat ▯ 2/3/16 ▯ Look at Pentagon Papers brief example on eLC. ▯ Fighting words must be in-your-face provocations ▯ True threat defined: Expression “intended to create a pervasive fear in victims that they are a target of violence.”  Duke law video on Virginia v. Black goes into some detail  The statute was unconstitutional because it allowed punishment of all cross burning, even if there is no intent to intimidate. E.g. cross burning in a film, in a private room. Burning a cross by itself doesn’t establish an intent to intimidate  Statute was too broad and was deemed unconstitutional  Elonis v. US said that you must show an intent to intimidate  A true threat through the internet ruled that Planned Parent case did intimidate abortion doctors online and that’s unconstitutional o The thing is if it’s on the Internet, that means that you were looking for it; it didn’t just come to you. The law was evaluated for the crime. The argument is that the crime is too far away from the speech.  Us V. Fullmer o Animal rights activists posted stickers of abused animals, posted personal info on website and asked employees by email how they would feel after they were cut up and even posted posters of the manager after he was beaten up  Watts V. US o Ruled not a true threat o Speaks about basically wanting to shoot President LBJ after he joins the military o Ruled political speech, didn’t even have a gun, and wasn’t in the army o The danger must be imminent, not a vague, distant threat  NAACP vs. Clairborne Hardward o Told black people their necks would be broken if they broke the boycott of white businesses o It was coercive but not a true threat  Anonymous Yik Yak speech o Said they wanted to lynch black study body president and shoot all black students o Our own case in the MLC  Can universities ban Yik Yak?  Yik Yak is the platform so they can’t be responsible for what’s posted on there  The can geofence high schools and not have Yik Yak allowed, but you can’t do that to colleges  True threats o Syracuse U post: “Faggot n-word”. It’s hate speech, but not a true threat. o She was suspended from soccer team.  True threats summary o Different cases and didn’t types of speech determine whether or not it’s a true threat o Also depends on if there’s an intent to intimidate. o Beyond true threats, the government can punish arson, assault, and intimidation o The Supreme Court is definitely prone not to create new categories when it comes to protected speech o Claiming you won a medal that you didn’ t win is an unprotected category ▯ Who is protected?  Adults have broad rights o Speaking and publishing is the strongest right o Right to associate o Right to privacy (not associating) ▯ 2/5/16 ▯ The government can more easily punish assault, arson, and criminal trespass because it isn’t speech. ▯ A true threat must be intentionally intimidating. ▯ Limited compelled speech  Unconstitutional to compel replies in media.  First Amendment prevents the media from being forced to say something that they don’t’ want to say. ▯ Government employees  Public employees have rights as public citizens  They can engage in lots of things  They can also like things on Facebook because it’s considered a form of speech. It’s speech as a private citizen. The American Civil Liberties Union case.  Judicial candidates also have a right to speak. They can discuss controversial legal and political issues, not just resumes.  The Hatch Act discusses disruptive workplace speech ▯ Whistleblowers  Protected in government and business  Takes complaints of fraud and mismanagement through official channels  No retribution or retaliation allowed  There is a purpose of Sarbanes-Oxley  Unprotected leaker o Edward Snowden and his whole thing  Released 1.7 million docs on the NSA o Chelsea Manning  Released computer docs to WikiLeaks  He had a lot of access because of what happened on 9/11. ▯ Traditional Forum  Historically open for speech (sidewalks, streets)  Viewpoint discrimination is not allowed, but the time, place, and manner regulation is constitutional ▯ Dedicated-Limited Forum  Tate Center is an example  Now viewpoint discrimination is allowed, but time, place, and manner regulations are okay ▯ Non-public forum  No compelling justification needed for regulation  The Red & Black is independent so that means it isn’t government property o The state has no control over it.


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

0 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


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'

Why people love StudySoup

Bentley McCaw University of Florida

"I was shooting for a perfect 4.0 GPA this semester. Having StudySoup as a study aid was critical to helping me achieve my goal...and I nailed it!"

Janice Dongeun University of Washington

"I used the money I made selling my notes & study guides to pay for spring break in Olympia, Washington...which was Sweet!"

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.