-
Schenck Vs. United States
Schenck distributed papers saying the WWI draft was unconstitutional, and told people to disobey the draft peacefully. He was charged with conspiracy to obstruct recruitment. He argued on the grounds that It violated his first amendment rights. The court ruled in favor of the US because during wartime the draft was constitutional. -
West Virginia State Board Of Education Vs. Barnette
The board of education made a rule that all children in public schools must salute the flag during the pledge of allegiance. Punishment could include expulsion and parents could lose custody of the children. A group of Jehovah's witnesses protested the law, they thought it violated the first amendment, and went against their religious beliefs. The court ruled in favor of the Jehovah's witnesses on because it violated the first amendment -
Brown Vs. Louisiana
The libraries were segregated by black and white. Mr Brown a black man entered the library with 4 other black people. They entered the white only part of the library to request a book and were told that the book wasn't available. Upon hearing this they sat down making no noise or disruptions and refused to leave. They were arrested for disobeying an officers orders of not leaving. The court ruled in favor of brown because the arrest violated their first amendment rights. -
Tinker Vs. Des Moines
Three students at a public school wore black armbands to silently protest the Vietnam war, and they were suspended for this, and they sued the district. The students appealed the US district court which ruled in favor of the school then to the 8th circuit court of appeals which was a tie so they took the last ruling in favor of the school. Then they went to the US supreme court and they ruled in favor of the students because it violated their 1st amendment rights because it was nonviolent. -
Brandenburg Vs. Ohio
Brandenburg was a leader of the KKK, and gave a speech advocating violence. He was charged for advocating a crime. The court ruled in favor of Brandenburg because he was practicing his first amendment rights when giving his speech. -
National Socialist Party Vs. Skokie
Skokie was a heavily populated jewish town and the national socialist party wanted to have a march there and wear something similar to nazi uniforms. The town wouldn't let them wear the uniforms or march because they thought it would cause problems in the town. The courts didn't let them march or wear the uniforms because it was expressing racist views. -
Bethel School District No. 403 Vs. Fraser
At a school assembly a student speaking to the class used profanity. He was suspended from school for 2 days as a result. The court ruled in favor of the school because it wasn't necessary for education. -
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye Vs. City of Hialeah
The church practiced a Caribbean based religion that sacrificed animals as a form of worship. When they opened a church in Florida the city passes ordinances against religious sacrifice. The church thought that it was against the constitution to ban religious sacrifices. The court ruled in favor of the ordinances and said that they didn't violate the first amendment and it was a just law -
First National Bank of Boston Vs. Bellotti
The National Bank of Boston wanted to spend money to oppose a ballot that would implement a gradual income tax. The attorney general told the bank that he would prohibit organizations from doing this because it influences voters but it doesn't affect their assets directly. The banks sued on grounds that it violated their first amendment rights. The courts ruled in favor of Bellotti because the corporations could influence voters. -
Minnesota Voters Alliance Vs. Mansky
The Minnesota law prohibits wearing a political insignia in a polling place. In 2010 a man wore a political shirt to a polling place and it took multiple tries for him to vote, because of his shirt. He is going to court saying that it violates his 1st amendment rights. The court ruled in favor of the Voters Alliance because they argued that a polling place is a nonpublic forum, so the state can place limits on freedom of speech. -
National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
A law was passed to ensure access to reproductive health services for all, but unlicensed clinics must inform patients that they are unlicensed. The unlicensed clinics thought this violated the first amendment. The court ruled in favor of the clinics because it was part of their constitutional rights.
