The First Amendment"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."
Source: The Constitution
|
The First Amendment encompasses several basic freedoms that often first come to mind when one hears "the Bill of Rights." These rights make up the backbone of the concept of American liberty. The First Amendment guarantees the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition.
Religion
The religion aspect of the First Amendment is split into the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. The Establishment Clause has been interpreted to prevent the federal government from establishing a national religion or preferring one religion over another. The Free Exercise Clause has been interpreted to allow all people to freely practice the religion of their choosing. Each of these clauses has been incorporated and applied to the states, and there have been several cases regarding each that have molded and shaped the freedom of religion in the United States.
|
Establishment Clause Cases:
In the 1947 case Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court set up "a wall of separation between the church and state" (Oyez 1), and applied to the states the rule that government may not play a role in establishing or recognizing any religion.
In the 1962 case Engel v. Vitale, the Supreme Court ruled that official prayer in public schools violates the Establishment Clause, indicating that students may not be forced to pray in school.
In the 1971 case Lemon v. Kurtzman, the Supreme Court ruled that direct government assistance to religious schools is unconstitutional. It also set up guidelines for government involvement with religion called the Lemon Test, which stated three clauses that must be met in order to avoid violating the Establishment Clause. These are; (1) The government action must have a secular legislative purpose (2) The government cannot primarily enforce religion (3) The government cannot "excessively entangle" with religion (Oyez 1).
In the 1990 case Westside Community Schools v. Mergens, the Supreme Court ruled that schools can use public funds to support clubs that are religious or political in nature.
Free Exercise Clause Cases:
In the 1878 case Reynolds v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a religious duty is not a viable defense to a criminal indictment. This established that illegal actions such as bigamy (the issue debated in the case) cannot be committed, even for religious purposes.
In the 1990 case Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith, the Supreme Court ruled that states have the right to deny unemployment benefits to someone fired for using prohibited drugs for religious purposes while working.
In the 1947 case Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court set up "a wall of separation between the church and state" (Oyez 1), and applied to the states the rule that government may not play a role in establishing or recognizing any religion.
In the 1962 case Engel v. Vitale, the Supreme Court ruled that official prayer in public schools violates the Establishment Clause, indicating that students may not be forced to pray in school.
In the 1971 case Lemon v. Kurtzman, the Supreme Court ruled that direct government assistance to religious schools is unconstitutional. It also set up guidelines for government involvement with religion called the Lemon Test, which stated three clauses that must be met in order to avoid violating the Establishment Clause. These are; (1) The government action must have a secular legislative purpose (2) The government cannot primarily enforce religion (3) The government cannot "excessively entangle" with religion (Oyez 1).
In the 1990 case Westside Community Schools v. Mergens, the Supreme Court ruled that schools can use public funds to support clubs that are religious or political in nature.
Free Exercise Clause Cases:
In the 1878 case Reynolds v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a religious duty is not a viable defense to a criminal indictment. This established that illegal actions such as bigamy (the issue debated in the case) cannot be committed, even for religious purposes.
In the 1990 case Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith, the Supreme Court ruled that states have the right to deny unemployment benefits to someone fired for using prohibited drugs for religious purposes while working.
Speech
In the 1919 case Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled to allow Congress to restrict speech that creates a clear and present danger. This means that, although Americans are free to speak as they please, they may not do so in a manner than endangers others, for example, shouting "fire" in a crowded movie theater.
In the 1925 case Gitlow v. New York, the Supreme Court ruled that state governments are not completely free to limit forms of political expression.
Symbolic Speech
In the 1969 case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, the Supreme Court upheld two students' right to wear black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War, a right protected as symbolic speech.
In the 1989 case Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not unconstitutional to burn the American flag, as it as an action protected by its nature as a symbolic expression of free speech.
In the 1925 case Gitlow v. New York, the Supreme Court ruled that state governments are not completely free to limit forms of political expression.
Symbolic Speech
In the 1969 case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, the Supreme Court upheld two students' right to wear black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War, a right protected as symbolic speech.
In the 1989 case Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not unconstitutional to burn the American flag, as it as an action protected by its nature as a symbolic expression of free speech.
Press
The Press aspect of the First Amendment has allowed newspapers, magazines, and other publications throughout the country to print the news freely without government censorship or intervention. The Court has ruled in several cases, including the previously explained Gitlow v. New York, upholding the right to free press and also defining how the right applies in more specific circumstances.
|
In the 1931 case Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court incorporated the right to free press and disallowed the restraint of press prior to its publication.
In the 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court ruled that in order to prove libel or defamation, actual malice must be proven. This means that press (and also speech) is protected unless the writer/speaker lies with the attempt to defame their subject. This case was used to legally allow the New York Times to publish the Pentagon Papers (Oyez).
In the 1988 case Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the Supreme Court ruled that public school officials have the right to censor school-sponsored publications as they are a part of the school curriculum, not a public forum for expression. This cases is an example of how the Court did restrict First Amendment rights throughout the incorporation process.
In the 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court ruled that in order to prove libel or defamation, actual malice must be proven. This means that press (and also speech) is protected unless the writer/speaker lies with the attempt to defame their subject. This case was used to legally allow the New York Times to publish the Pentagon Papers (Oyez).
In the 1988 case Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the Supreme Court ruled that public school officials have the right to censor school-sponsored publications as they are a part of the school curriculum, not a public forum for expression. This cases is an example of how the Court did restrict First Amendment rights throughout the incorporation process.
Assembly
In the 1937 case De Jonge v. Oregon, the Supreme Court upheld the right to free assembly at the state level, allowing the defendant Dirk De Jonge to organize and speak at meetings even though they were regarding politically concerning content.
In the 1977 case National Socialist Party v. Village of Skokie, the Supreme Court ruled that groups cannot be prevented from convening based on the content of their message. Although they eventually chose not to do so, the National Socialist Party's right to assemble peacefully was upheld.
In the 1977 case National Socialist Party v. Village of Skokie, the Supreme Court ruled that groups cannot be prevented from convening based on the content of their message. Although they eventually chose not to do so, the National Socialist Party's right to assemble peacefully was upheld.
Petition
In the 2011 case Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri, the Supreme Court ruled that government employees may not sue their employers for retaliation when they petition the government on matters of private concern (the petition must be relevant to a matter of public concern. However, this case recognized lawsuits as "petitions" under the First Amendment. In its statement, the Court said that "the right to petition allows citizens to express their ideas, hopes, and concerns to their government and their elected representatives."
The First Amendment in Action Today
In most occurrences, cases involving the First Amendment have been decided in a way that protects the rights of the people in a manner that is safe for the individuals involved and the country. However, a recent debate on the upholding of First Amendment rights stemmed from the 2011 case Snyder v. Phelps. The defendants in this case are more commonly known as the Westboro Baptist Church members. This religious association was sued for intentionally inflicting emotional distress on the family of a deceased American soldier whose funeral they picketed and protest outside of. The Westboro Baptist Church members have become known for their extreme public protests against the ideals of the general public on issues such as gay marriage and the military. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protected the church members from liability for the damages they caused. While extreme, this is an example of how American people have the right to freely exercise their preferred religion, speak as they see fit, print what they want, associate as they desire, and petition the government when necessary. If the First Amendment had not been incorporated, we would not be able to do any of these things!