JMC 2600 FINAL | STUDY GUIDE
Bradenburg v. Ohio (1969) - Answers - Clarence Brandenburg called for a march on
DC.
1st Amendment; hate speech; assembly; "imminent lawless action" test
Burstyn v. Wilson (1952) - Answers - Supreme Court ruled that motion pictures or a
medium for communication of ideas in this protected by the First Amendment
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942) - Answers - Certain "well‐defined and narrowly
limited" categories of speech fall outside the bounds of constitutional protection. Thus,
"the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous," and (in this case) insulting or
"fighting" words neither contributed to the expression of ideas nor possessed any "social
value" in the search for truth
Citzens United v FEC (2010) - Answers - Sides with "free speech." corporate speech is
protected under the first amendment.
Cohen v. California (1971) - Answers - -Cohen wore a jacket in L.A. courthouse that
said "f*ck the draft"
-Arrested for disturbing the peace
-Supreme court overturned the conviction ruling that political expression is protected by
1st amendment.
Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003) - Answers - U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Bono Copyright
Term Extension Act which provided continued protection of copyrights held by
companies such as Disney. Extended time limits by 20 years, life plus 50 years to life
plus 70 years. Works for hire were extended to 95 years from publication or 120 years
from creation.
Marbury v. Madison (1803) - Answers - Established judicial review
Masses Publishing v. Patten - Answers - Postmaster General Albert Burleson
designated the August, 1917 issue of The Masses un-mailable according to the
provisions of the Espionage Act, arguing that its contents attempted "to cause
insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty."
Judge Learned Hand argued that the terminology "cause" was too broad, and that the
government had failed to demonstrate clear advocacy of unlawful conduct.
Miller v. California - Answers - A 1973 Supreme Court decision that avoided defining
obscenity by holding that community standards be used to determine whether material
is obscene in terms of appealing to a "prurient interest" and being "patently offensive"
and lacking in value.
, Mutual v. Ohio (1915) - Answers - - decided that film is a "business, plain and simple"
- "a spectacle with a special capacity for evil"
Film is a business and thus not protected by the first amendment. Birth of a Nation
could be censored.
National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977) - Answers - Skokie issues
an injunction preventing Nazis from marching. Defended by the ACLU where it is
decided that Nazis have the right to march.
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) - Answers - The Supreme Court concluded that
"actual malice" must be proved to support a finding of libel against a public figure.
New York Times v. US - Answers - The President argues that the publication of the
Pentagon Papers is in violation of executive privilege. Result: The barring of the
publication of these papers is in violation of the 1st A. Publication does not imperial the
public.
Paris Theatre I v. Slaton - Answers - Films do not have protection from obscenity
restrictions simply because they are only shown to consenting adults.
R.A.V. v. St. Paul (1992) - Answers - An ordinance banning the display of any symbols
promoting hatred based on race, gender or religion was unconstitutional due to under-
inclusiveness and viewpoint discrimination.
Roth v. US (1957) - Answers - Est. that "obscenity is not within the area of
constitutionally protected speech or press"
Texas v. Johnson (1989) - Answers - Flag-burning is symbolic speech with a political
purpose and is protected by 1st Amendment.
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) - Answers - Public school students may wear armbands to
class protesting against America's war in Vietnam when such display does not disrupt
classes
Zenger Trial (1735) - Answers - New York libel case against John Peter Zenger.
Established the principle that truthful statements about public officials could not be
prosecuted as libel.
Alien and Sedition Acts - Answers - acts passed by federalists giving the government
power to imprison or deport foreign citizens and prosecute critics of the government
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act - Answers - Banned soft money donations to political
parties (loophole from FECA); also imposed restrictions on 527 independent
expenditures (issue ads only, not direct advocacy for a candidate). Declared
unconstitutional by Citizens United case. Also known as McCain-Feingold Act.
Bradenburg v. Ohio (1969) - Answers - Clarence Brandenburg called for a march on
DC.
1st Amendment; hate speech; assembly; "imminent lawless action" test
Burstyn v. Wilson (1952) - Answers - Supreme Court ruled that motion pictures or a
medium for communication of ideas in this protected by the First Amendment
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942) - Answers - Certain "well‐defined and narrowly
limited" categories of speech fall outside the bounds of constitutional protection. Thus,
"the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous," and (in this case) insulting or
"fighting" words neither contributed to the expression of ideas nor possessed any "social
value" in the search for truth
Citzens United v FEC (2010) - Answers - Sides with "free speech." corporate speech is
protected under the first amendment.
Cohen v. California (1971) - Answers - -Cohen wore a jacket in L.A. courthouse that
said "f*ck the draft"
-Arrested for disturbing the peace
-Supreme court overturned the conviction ruling that political expression is protected by
1st amendment.
Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003) - Answers - U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Bono Copyright
Term Extension Act which provided continued protection of copyrights held by
companies such as Disney. Extended time limits by 20 years, life plus 50 years to life
plus 70 years. Works for hire were extended to 95 years from publication or 120 years
from creation.
Marbury v. Madison (1803) - Answers - Established judicial review
Masses Publishing v. Patten - Answers - Postmaster General Albert Burleson
designated the August, 1917 issue of The Masses un-mailable according to the
provisions of the Espionage Act, arguing that its contents attempted "to cause
insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty."
Judge Learned Hand argued that the terminology "cause" was too broad, and that the
government had failed to demonstrate clear advocacy of unlawful conduct.
Miller v. California - Answers - A 1973 Supreme Court decision that avoided defining
obscenity by holding that community standards be used to determine whether material
is obscene in terms of appealing to a "prurient interest" and being "patently offensive"
and lacking in value.
, Mutual v. Ohio (1915) - Answers - - decided that film is a "business, plain and simple"
- "a spectacle with a special capacity for evil"
Film is a business and thus not protected by the first amendment. Birth of a Nation
could be censored.
National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977) - Answers - Skokie issues
an injunction preventing Nazis from marching. Defended by the ACLU where it is
decided that Nazis have the right to march.
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) - Answers - The Supreme Court concluded that
"actual malice" must be proved to support a finding of libel against a public figure.
New York Times v. US - Answers - The President argues that the publication of the
Pentagon Papers is in violation of executive privilege. Result: The barring of the
publication of these papers is in violation of the 1st A. Publication does not imperial the
public.
Paris Theatre I v. Slaton - Answers - Films do not have protection from obscenity
restrictions simply because they are only shown to consenting adults.
R.A.V. v. St. Paul (1992) - Answers - An ordinance banning the display of any symbols
promoting hatred based on race, gender or religion was unconstitutional due to under-
inclusiveness and viewpoint discrimination.
Roth v. US (1957) - Answers - Est. that "obscenity is not within the area of
constitutionally protected speech or press"
Texas v. Johnson (1989) - Answers - Flag-burning is symbolic speech with a political
purpose and is protected by 1st Amendment.
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) - Answers - Public school students may wear armbands to
class protesting against America's war in Vietnam when such display does not disrupt
classes
Zenger Trial (1735) - Answers - New York libel case against John Peter Zenger.
Established the principle that truthful statements about public officials could not be
prosecuted as libel.
Alien and Sedition Acts - Answers - acts passed by federalists giving the government
power to imprison or deport foreign citizens and prosecute critics of the government
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act - Answers - Banned soft money donations to political
parties (loophole from FECA); also imposed restrictions on 527 independent
expenditures (issue ads only, not direct advocacy for a candidate). Declared
unconstitutional by Citizens United case. Also known as McCain-Feingold Act.
