First Ammendment

  • Jul 8, 1215

    The Magna Carta

    The Magna Carta
    A revolt of nobles force England's King John to sign the Magna Carta. This established that no one including the king or lawmakers are above the law, this is the framework of the Declaration of Independence
  • Patterson V. Colorado

    Patterson V. Colorado
    the first free-press case, the U.S. Supreme Court determines it does not have jurisdiction to review the conviction of U.S. senator and Denver newspaper publisher Thomas Patterson for articles and a cartoon that criticized the state supreme court. After the case it leaves the question undecided. but states that "he Court holds that the free-speech and press guarantees only guard against prior restraint and do not prevent “subsequent punishment.”
  • Debs v the US

    Debs v the US
    he U.S. Supreme Court upholds the conviction of socialist and presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs under the Espionage Act for making speeches opposing World War I. Justice Holmes claims to apply the “clear and present danger” test; however, he phrases it as requiring that Debs’ words have a “natural tendency and reasonably probable effect” of obstructing recruitment. The decision is made that you cannot talk apposing the current war efforts which takes effect during the Vietnam War.
  • Shenck V the US

    Shenck V the US
    U.S. Supreme Court Justice Holmes puts the clear and present danger test Schenck and others had been accused of urging draftees to oppose the draft and “not submit to intimidation.” Justice Holmes also writes that not all speech is protected by the First Amendment, citing the now-famous example of falsely crying “fire” in a crowded theater.
  • Gitlow V New York

    Gitlow V New York
    the U.S. Supreme Court upholds under the New York criminal anarchy statute Benjamin Gitlow’s conviction for writing and distributing “The Left Wing Manifesto.” The court decided that the bill of rights not only applies to the federal government but also that of the states. Which had previously only applied to Federal.
  • Whitney V California

    Whitney V California
    Charlotte Anita Whitney, a founding member of the Communist Labor Party of California, was prosecuted under the California’s Criminal Syndicalism Act which says that you cannot advocate violence, sabotage, violence, or other methods of terrorism. The court decided that the act didn't violate the constitution and that the 1st amendment is not an absolute right.
  • Near V Minnesota

    Near V Minnesota
    The Saturday Press, Jay Near and Howard Guilford accused local officials of being implicated with gangsters. t violated the Public Nuisance Law because it was malicious, scandalous, and defamatory. The law provided that any person "engaged in the business" of regularly publishing or circulating an "obscene, lewd, and lascivious" or a "malicious, scandalous and defamatory" court decided that with some narrow exceptions the gov can't censor otherwise prohibit a publication in advance.
  • Brandenburg v Ohio

    Brandenburg v Ohio
    Members of the KKK argue that they have the right to publicly speak and meet with each other. Decided to reestablish what the clear and present danger means in modern times. It says that it restricts speech that "s directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and is likely to incite or produce such action."
  • Case V the Unified school district

    Case V the Unified school district
    the Olathe, Kansas, School Board voted to remove the book Annie on My Mind, a novel depicting a lesbian relationship between two teenagers, the federal district court in Kansas found they violated the students' rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. the decision was to have the books re-inputted because it became obvious from their testimony that the book was removed because they disapproved of the book's ideology.
  • Campbell v Pammany Parish school board

    Campbell v Pammany Parish school board
    The public school removed the books the voodoo and the hoodoo, which described the religions of voodoo and hoodoo. At first the court said that there was nothing unconstitutional about the schools decision. Before the trial was ended the school decided to put the books back ending the issue.