Surname 1
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
The First Amendment Rights
Introduction
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution codifies fundamental rights
required for a democratic society. It protects freedoms related to speech, religion, the press,
assembly, and the ability to petition the government. The rights enable citizens to communicate
freely, worship their faith, and protest government actions without fear. While the protection is
provided for all citizens of the United States, their applicability under certain circumstances,
such as within prisons, is controversial. This paper will cover the First Amendment, discuss a
relevant Supreme Court case, and address the extent to which prisoners must be granted these
rights.
Understanding the First Amendment
Following the ratification of the First Amendment in 1791, the federal government and
Congress became restricted from establishing a national faith or impeding religious practices
while also abandoning any power to silence free speech and press along with the right to
peaceful assembly and petition. The Amendment states that Congress cannot create laws
regarding religion or encroach upon religious freedoms while simultaneously blocking speech,
press rights, peaceful assembly rights, and governmental grievances. Through this Amendment,
the government is prevented from becoming too powerful by ensuring the protection of free
speech areas that support democratic discussion (Eberle 48). Through time, the U.S. Supreme
, Surname 2
Court has effectively defined the extent of these rights as established by the Constitution. These
legal protections have been evaluated through multiple court cases, which shaped their
boundaries in multiple societal areas, including educational settings and correctional centers
along with working environments. The judiciary continues to define and refine these rights to
ensure both societal relevance and the protection of individual liberties and public welfare.
Supreme Court Case: “Turner v. Safley (1987)”
The U.S. Supreme Court established Turne v. Safley (1987) as one of its defining cases
that considers First Amendment rights within prison settings. Two Missouri prison regulations
limited inmate activities by prohibiting mail contact with prisoners at different facilities without
supervisor approval and preventing unapproved inmate marriages (Roth 667). The inmates
brought forth a legal challenge against both regulations since they believed they limited their
freedom of expression and association protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court
established a standard that states that prison regulations that reduce constitutional rights may be
valid only when they maintain a direct relationship with necessary prison purposes. Security
needs justified the correspondence restrictions, yet the marriage ban failed to satisfy the Court
because it showed no relationship to security concerns. This decision created the basic principles
that courts must use when determining constitutional issues for prisoners by measuring security
requirements against personal liberties.
Moreover, Turner v. Safley encouraged the constitutional rights of prisoners to remain
protected, but prison authorities may limit specific rights if necessary to secure prison operations
(Roth 668). According to the decision's standards, prisoners maintain prison administrator
discretion through the proper justification of security-based restrictions, which must be founded
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
The First Amendment Rights
Introduction
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution codifies fundamental rights
required for a democratic society. It protects freedoms related to speech, religion, the press,
assembly, and the ability to petition the government. The rights enable citizens to communicate
freely, worship their faith, and protest government actions without fear. While the protection is
provided for all citizens of the United States, their applicability under certain circumstances,
such as within prisons, is controversial. This paper will cover the First Amendment, discuss a
relevant Supreme Court case, and address the extent to which prisoners must be granted these
rights.
Understanding the First Amendment
Following the ratification of the First Amendment in 1791, the federal government and
Congress became restricted from establishing a national faith or impeding religious practices
while also abandoning any power to silence free speech and press along with the right to
peaceful assembly and petition. The Amendment states that Congress cannot create laws
regarding religion or encroach upon religious freedoms while simultaneously blocking speech,
press rights, peaceful assembly rights, and governmental grievances. Through this Amendment,
the government is prevented from becoming too powerful by ensuring the protection of free
speech areas that support democratic discussion (Eberle 48). Through time, the U.S. Supreme
, Surname 2
Court has effectively defined the extent of these rights as established by the Constitution. These
legal protections have been evaluated through multiple court cases, which shaped their
boundaries in multiple societal areas, including educational settings and correctional centers
along with working environments. The judiciary continues to define and refine these rights to
ensure both societal relevance and the protection of individual liberties and public welfare.
Supreme Court Case: “Turner v. Safley (1987)”
The U.S. Supreme Court established Turne v. Safley (1987) as one of its defining cases
that considers First Amendment rights within prison settings. Two Missouri prison regulations
limited inmate activities by prohibiting mail contact with prisoners at different facilities without
supervisor approval and preventing unapproved inmate marriages (Roth 667). The inmates
brought forth a legal challenge against both regulations since they believed they limited their
freedom of expression and association protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court
established a standard that states that prison regulations that reduce constitutional rights may be
valid only when they maintain a direct relationship with necessary prison purposes. Security
needs justified the correspondence restrictions, yet the marriage ban failed to satisfy the Court
because it showed no relationship to security concerns. This decision created the basic principles
that courts must use when determining constitutional issues for prisoners by measuring security
requirements against personal liberties.
Moreover, Turner v. Safley encouraged the constitutional rights of prisoners to remain
protected, but prison authorities may limit specific rights if necessary to secure prison operations
(Roth 668). According to the decision's standards, prisoners maintain prison administrator
discretion through the proper justification of security-based restrictions, which must be founded
