Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ... Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish sentiments on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of this liberty;... |
| | Freedom of Speech is the foundation of our vigorous modern democracy: its fundamental nature is evident in the generally unequivocal Supreme Court support it has enjoyed for most of the 20th century, despite the number of challenges it faces annually. Like much of the Bill of Rights, however, the basic tolerance of opinion modern Americans assume in the contexts of art, music, political advocacy, and simple private communication was not protected for well over half of the nation's history. Freedom of Speech as we understand it today first evolved out of the dissenting opinion in Abrams v. U.S., which argued that speech could be punished only if it presented a "clear and present danger" of harm. The "clear and present danger test" became the free speech standard until 1969, when Brandenburg v. Ohio raised that standard to suppress speech only if it is "intended and likely to produce imminent lawless action." This broad protection allows for a diverse exchange of ideas, but also holds the possibility that all speech be threatened, if any speech is threatened. |
|
 |
Tuesday, September 3, 2002 |
|
Sunday, September 1, 2002 |
Maine Dress Codes Balance Learning and Expression
Maine school districts are instituting written dress codes to avoid class distraction in what this article calls a "sex-sells/MTV culture." The article highlights the fact that an established dress code is the fairest way to have a dress policy at a school, because it does not leave dress standards up to individual teachers' tastes. The Supreme Court has ruled that schools can set dress codes within reason, despite freedom of expression issues.
Louise Roback, MCLU executive director:
"'The school exists to educate kids,' she said. 'We don't quarrel with the finding that sexually revealing clothing can be disruptive. We're not going to battle over that.' A case could be made for wearing T-shirts with controversial messages on them, she said. 'Sometimes government and schools prohibit things because it's just embarrassing, that they're just a little uncomfortable,' she said. 'Schools are overreaching when they try to impose excessive conformity, like with uniforms,' she said. 'If they're just trying to keep up with the latest 16-year-old TV star, it's not really on our radar screen.'"
Nonetheless, students don't see the need, says Miranda Peters, a senior at Brunswick High School: "'They say it's a distraction to us, but it's really not a problem.'" [Portland Press Herald]
5:08:26 PM 
|
|
|
Saturday, August 31, 2002 |
49%: "First Amendment Goes Too Far"
The annual State of the First Amendment survey, released on Thursday, had found that just under half of the Americans surveyed felt that the First Amendment guarantees too much freedom. The 49% figure, according to the center, is a ten percent jump since September 11. The survey found that between forty and fifty percent of Americans supported increased surveillance of religious groups, bar criticism of government actions, and monitor muslim citizens particularly closely. Forty percent also found the press too aggressive in questioning the government in the war on terror.
More information at the Sacramento Bee. The report is available for download. [Privacy Digest and Slashdot]
1:42:47 AM
|
|
|
Wednesday, August 28, 2002 |
American Library Association: The USA-Patriot Act
The American Library Association has posted a collection of information about the investigative provisions of the USA-Patriot Act. The collection is intended to be a guide for librarians, but is also very useful for library users interested in the impact on their privacy and due process rights. [From the Scout Report]
2:02:56 PM
|
|
|
Saturday, August 10, 2002 |
Welcome to the Freedom of Speech page.
8:41:15 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2002 Lucas Burke.
|
|
|
