NationMaster - Encyclopedia: First Amendment to the United States Constitution

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the United States Bill of Rights. It prohibits the federal legislature from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" (the "Establishment Clause") or that prohibit free exercise of religion (the "Free Exercise Clause"), laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to assemble peaceably, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Image File history File linksMetadata Download high resolution version (4318x4592, 1500 KB) Description: THE BILL OF RIGHTS Credit: NARA [1] Usage: File links The following pages link to this file: United States Constitution United States Bill of Rights Metadata This file contains additional information, probably added from the digital camera... Image File history File linksMetadata Download high resolution version (4318x4592, 1500 KB) Description: THE BILL OF RIGHTS Credit: NARA [1] Usage: File links The following pages link to this file: United States Constitution United States Bill of Rights Metadata This file contains additional information, probably added from the digital camera... The National Archives building in Washington, DC The United States National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is an independent agency of the United States federal government charged with preserving and documenting government and historical records. ... Wikisource has original text related to this article: The United States Constitution The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. ... The United States Bill of Rights consists of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. ... Type Bicameral Houses Senate House of Representatives President of the Senate President pro tempore Dick Cheney, (R) since January 20, 2001 Robert C. Byrd, (D) since January 4, 2007 Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, (D) since January 4, 2007 Members 535 plus 4 Delegates and 1 Resident Commissioner Political... The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution states that: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion Together with the Free Exercise Clause, (or prohibiting the free exercise thereof), these two clauses make up what are commonly known as the religion clauses. ... The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society. ... The Bill of Rights, First Amendment to the United States Constitution, passed in 1789 includes the Free Exercise Clause which guarantees the freedom of religion: 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... This article is about the general concept. ... Freedom of the Press (or Press Freedom) is the guarantee by a government of free public press for its citizens and their associations, extended to members of news gathering organizations, and their published reporting. ... Group of women holding placards with political activist slogans: know your courts - study your politicians, Liberty in law, Law makers must not be law breakers, and character in candidates photo 1920 Freedom of assembly is the freedom to associate with, or organize any groups, gatherings, clubs, or organizations that one... The right to petition is the freedom of individuals (and sometimes groups and corporations) to petition their government for a correction or repair of some form of injustice without fear of punishment for the same. ... A grievance is a formal statement of complaint, generally against an authority figure. ...

Although the First Amendment explicitly prohibits only the named rights from being abridged by laws made by Congress, the courts have interpreted it as applying more broadly. As the first sentence in the body of the Constitution reserves all law-making ("legislative") authority to Congress, the courts have held that the First Amendment's terms also extend to the executive and judicial branches. Additionally, in the 20th century the Supreme Court has held that the Due Process clause of the 1868 Fourteenth Amendment "incorporates" the limitations of the First Amendment to restrict also the states. Federal courts Supreme Court Circuit Courts of Appeal District Courts Elections Presidential elections Midterm elections Political Parties Democratic Republican Third parties State & Local government Governors Legislatures (List) State Courts Local Government Other countries Atlas US Government Portal The Supreme Court of the United States (sometimes colloquially referred to by the... Amendment XIV in the National Archives The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (Amendment XIV) is one of the post-Civil War amendments (known as the Reconstruction Amendments), first intended to secure rights for former slaves. ... Incorporation of the Bill of Rights is the legal doctrine by which portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights are applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. ...

Text

Background

The original text of the Constitution generated some opposition on the ground that it did not include adequate guarantees of civil liberties. In response, the First Amendment, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights, was adopted. The process of adoption by ratifications by the requisite number of states was completed in December 15, 1791. Anti-Federalism was the name given to two distinct counter-movements in the late 18th Century American politics: The first Anti-Federalist movement formed in reaction to the Federalist movement of the 1780s. ... The United States Bill of Rights consists of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. ... Ratification is the act of giving official sanction to a formal document such as a treaty or constitution. ... is the 349th day of the year (350th in leap years) in the Gregorian calendar. ... 1791 (MDCCXCI) was a common year starting on Saturday (see link for calendar) of the Gregorian calendar (or a common year starting on Tuesday of the 11-day-slower Julian calendar). ...

Establishment of religion

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Prior to the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, and for 60 years thereafter, the courts took the position that the substantive protections of the Bill of Rights did not apply to actions by state governments. Subsequently, under the "incorporation doctrine", certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the establishment and free exercise clauses in such a manner as to restrict substantially the promotion of religion by state governments. (For example, in the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion".) The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution states that: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion Together with the Free Exercise Clause, (or prohibiting the free exercise thereof), these two clauses make up what are commonly known as the religion clauses. ... Amendment XIV in the National Archives The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (Amendment XIV) is one of the post-Civil War amendments (known as the Reconstruction Amendments), first intended to secure rights for former slaves. ... The Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution is applied to state governments by the judicially created Incorporation Doctrine. ... Federal courts Supreme Court Circuit Courts of Appeal District Courts Elections Presidential elections Midterm elections Political Parties Democratic Republican Third parties State & Local government Governors Legislatures (List) State Courts Local Government Other countries Atlas US Government Portal The Supreme Court of the United States (sometimes colloquially referred to by the... Holding --- Court membership Case opinions Laws applied --- Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... David Hackett Souter (born September 17, 1939) has been an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States since 1990. ...

Free exercise of religion

The Warren Court held that this meant governments must have a compelling interest before passing a law that unduly burdens the practice of religion. Later court decisions retreated from this standard, permitting governmental actions that were neutral to interfere with religion, but Congress attempted to restore it by passing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which the Supreme Court held was inapplicable to state and local government actions, albeit applicable to federal action. City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997) The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, taken with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment make up the Religion Clauses. ... Earl Warren Earl Warren (March 19, 1891 – July 9, 1974) was a California district attorney and 30th Governor of California, but is best known as the 14th Chief Justice of the United States from 1953-1969. ... The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. Â§ 2000bb, also known as RFRA) is a 1993 United States federal law aimed at preventing laws which substantially burden a persons free exercise of their religion. ... City of Boerne v. ... // The United States Reports, the official reporter of the Supreme Court of the United States Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a neutral form which will...

Freedom of speech

Citizens of the United States often treat free speech as a fundamental right and often a matter of patriotism. ...

Sedition

Remarkably, the Supreme Court did not consider a single case in which it was asked to strike down a federal law on the basis of the free speech clause until the twentieth century. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 were never ruled upon by the Supreme Court, and even the leading critics of the law, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, argued for the laws' unconstitutionality on the basis of the Tenth Amendment, not the First Amendment. Federal courts Supreme Court Circuit Courts of Appeal District Courts Elections Presidential elections Midterm elections Political Parties Democratic Republican Third parties State & Local government Governors Legislatures (List) State Courts Local Government Other countries Atlas US Government Portal The Supreme Court of the United States (sometimes colloquially referred to by the... Judicial review is the power of a court to review the actions of public sector bodies in terms of their legality or constitutionality. ... ======== many recent edits that had nothing to do with article. ... Thomas Jefferson (13 April 1743 N.S.â€“4 July 1826) was the third President of the United States (1801â€“09), the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776), and one of the most influential Founding Fathers for his promotion of the ideals of Republicanism in the United States. ... James Madison (March 16, 1751 â€“ June 28, 1836), was an American politician and the fourth President of the United States (1809â€“1817), and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. ... For Ireland, see Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland. ...

After World War I, several cases involving laws limiting speech came before the Supreme Court. The Espionage Act of 1917 imposed a maximum sentence of twenty years for anyone who caused or attempted to cause "insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty in the military or naval forces of the United States." Under the Act, over two thousand prosecutions were commenced. For instance, one filmmaker was sentenced to ten years imprisonment because his portrayal of British soldiers in a movie about the American Revolution impugned the good faith of an American ally, the United Kingdom. The Sedition Act of 1918 went even further, criminalizing "disloyal," "scurrilous" or "abusive" language against the government. â€œThe Great War â€ redirects here. ... The Espionage Act of 1917 was a United States federal law passed shortly after entering World War I, on June 15, 1917, which made it a crime for a person to convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States... John Trumbulls Declaration of Independence, showing the five-man committee in charge of drafting the Declaration in 1776 as it presents its work to the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia The American Revolution refers to the period during the last half of the 18th century in which the Thirteen... The Sedition Act of 1918 was an amendment to the Espionage Act of 1917 passed at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, who was concerned that dissent, in time of war, was a significant threat to morale. ...

The Supreme Court was first requested to strike down a law violating the free speech clause in 1919. The case involved Charles Schenck, who had during the war published leaflets challenging the conscription system then in effect. The Supreme Court unanimously upheld Schenck's conviction for violating the Espionage Act when it decided Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919). Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., writing for the Court, suggested that "the question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent." Holding Defendants criticism of the draft was not protected by the First Amendment, because it created a clear and present danger to the enlistment and recruiting practices of the U.S. armed forces during a state of war. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. ... For the book, see Clear and Present Danger. ...

The "clear and present danger" test of Schenck was extended in Debs v. United States, 249 U.S. 211 (1919), again by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. The case involved a speech made by Eugene V. Debs, a political activist. Debs had not spoken any words that posed a "clear and present danger" to the conscription system, but a speech in which he denounced militarism was nonetheless found to be sufficient grounds for his conviction. Justice Holmes suggested that the speech had a "natural tendency" to occlude the draft. The case surrounded a speech in Canton, Ohio against World War I given by him publicly. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Eugene Victor Debs (November 5, 1855 â€“ October 20, 1926) was an American labor and political leader, one of the founders of the International Labor Union, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), and five-time Socialist Party of America candidate for President of the United States. ... Militarism or militarist ideology is the doctrinal view of a society as being best served (or more efficient) when it is governed or guided by concepts embodied in the culture, doctrine, system, or people of the military. ...

Thus, the Supreme Court effectively shaped the First Amendment in such a manner as to permit a multitude of restrictions on speech. Further restrictions on speech were accepted by the Supreme Court when it decided Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925). Writing for the majority, Justice Edward Sanford suggested that states could punish words that "by their very nature, involve danger to the public peace and to the security of the state." Lawmakers were given the freedom to decide which speech would constitute a danger. Holding Though the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from infringing free speech, the defendant was properly convicted under New Yorks criminal anarchy law for advocating the violent overthrow of the government, through the dissemination of Communist pamphlets. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Edward Terry Sanford (July 23, 1865-March 8, 1930) was an American jurist who served on the United States Supreme Court. ...

Freedom of speech was influenced by anti-Communism during the Cold War. In 1940, Congress enacted the Smith Act to replace the Sedition Act of 1918, which had expired in 1921. The Smith Act made punishable the advocacy of "the propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force and violence." The law was mainly used as a weapon against Communist leaders. The constitutionality of the Act was questioned in the case Dennis v. United States 341 U.S. 494 (1951). The Court upheld the law in 1951 by a six-two vote (Justice Tom C. Clark did not participate because he had previously ordered the prosecutions when he was Attorney General). Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson relied on Oliver Wendell Holmes' "clear and present danger" test when he wrote for the majority. Vinson suggested that the doctrine did not require the government to "wait until the putsch is about to be executed, the plans have been laid and the signal is awaited", thereby broadly defining the words "clear and present danger". Thus, even though there was no immediate danger posed by the Communist Party's ideas, their speech was restricted by the Court. For other uses, see Cold War (disambiguation). ... The Alien Registration Act or Smith Act () of 1940 is a United States federal statute that made it a criminal offense for anyone to It also required all non-citizen adult residents to register with the government; within four months, 4,741,971 aliens had registered under the Acts... This article is about communism as a form of society and as a political movement. ... Holding Defendants convictions for conspiring, through their participation in the Communist Party, to overthrow the U.S. government by force were not prohibited by the First Amendment. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Thomas Campbell Clark (September 23, 1899 â€“ June 13, 1977) was United States Attorney General from 1945 to 1949 and an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (1949-1967). ... In most common law jurisdictions, the Attorney General is the main legal adviser to the government, and in some jurisdictions may in addition have executive responsibility for law enforcement or responsibility for public prosecutions. ... Frederick Moore Vinson (January 22, 1890 â€“ September 8, 1953) served the United States in all three branches of government. ...

Dennis has never been explicitly overruled by the Court, but subsequent decisions have in practice reversed the case. In 1957, the Court changed its interpretation of the Smith Act in deciding Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (1957). The Supreme Court ruled that the Act was aimed at "the advocacy of action, not ideas". Thus, the advocacy of abstract doctrine remains protected under the First Amendment. Only speech explicitly inciting the forcible overthrow of the government remains punishable under the Smith Act. Holding The Court held that for the Smith Act to be violated, people must be encouraged to do something, rather than merely to believe in something. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ...

In Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation freedom of speech came into play. It was argued what could and couldn't be said on radio and TV. Holding Because of the pervasive nature of broadcasting, it has less First Amendment protection than other forms of communication. ...

War protests

The Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren expanded free speech protections in the 1960s, though there were exceptions. However, in 1968, the Court upheld a law prohibiting the mutilation of draft cards in United States v. O'Brien 391 U.S. 367 (1968). The Court ruled that protesters could not burn draft cards because doing so would interfere with the "smooth and efficient functioning" of the draft system. Then again, in 1971, the court found that a person could not be punished for wearing, in the corridors of the Los Angeles county Courthouse, a jacket reading "Fuck the Draft," Cohen v. California (403 U.S. 15). For the swing saxophonist and occasional singer, see Earle Warren Earl Warren (March 19, 1891 â€“ July 9, 1974) was a California district attorney of Alameda County, the 20th Attorney General of California, the 30th Governor of California, and the 14th Chief Justice of the United States (from 1953 to 1969). ... Colloquial name for a registration document completed by a citizen of a country which enforces conscription. ... Holding A criminal prohibition against burning draft cards did not violate the First Amendment, because its effect on speech was only incidental, and it was justified by the significant government interest in maintaining an efficient and effective military draft system. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Holding The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, prohibits states from making the public display of a single four-letter expletive a criminal offense, without a more specific and compelling reason than a general tendency to disturb the peace. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ...

In 1969, the Supreme Court ruled that free speech rights extended to students in school while deciding Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). The case involved several students who were punished for wearing black arm-bands to protest the Vietnam War. The Supreme Court ruled that the school could not restrict symbolic speech that did not cause undue interruptions of school activities. Justice Abe Fortas wrote, "schools may not be enclaves of totalitarianism. School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students...are possessed of fundamental rights which the State must respect, just as they themselves must respect their obligations to the State." The decision was arguably overruled, or at least undermined, by Bethel School District v. Fraser 478 U.S. 675 (1986), in which the Court held a student could be punished for his speech before a public assembly. Holding The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, did not permit a public school to punish a student for wearing a black armband as an anti-war protest, absent any evidence that the rule was necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others. ... Combatants Republic of Vietnam United States Republic of Korea Thailand Australia New Zealand The Philippines National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam Democratic Republic of Vietnam Peopleâ€™s Republic of China Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea Strength US 1,000,000 South Korea 300,000 Australia 48,000... Abe Fortas (June 19, 1910â€“April 5, 1982) was a U.S. Supreme Court associate justice. ... Holding The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, permits a public school to punish a student for giving a lewd and indecent, but not obscene, speech at a school assembly. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ...

Also in 1969, the Court decided the landmark Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) , which overruled Whitney v. California 274 U.S. 357 (1927), a case in which a woman was imprisoned for aiding the Communist Party. Brandenburg effectively swept away Dennis as well, casting the right to speak freely of violent action and revolution in broad terms: "[Our] decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." Some claim that Brandenburg essentially sets forth a reworded "clear and present danger" test, but the accuracy of such statements is hard to judge. The Court has never heard or decided a case involving seditious speech since Brandenburg was handed down. Holding Ohios criminal syndicalism statute violated the First Amendment, as applied to the state through the Fourteenth, because it broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence rather than the constitutionally unprotected incitement to imminent lawless action. ... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Holding Defendants conviction under Californias criminal syndicalism statute for membership in the Communist Labor Party did not violate her free speech rights as protected under the Fourteenth Amendment, because states may constitutionally prohibit speech tending to incite to crime, disturb the public peace, or threaten the overthrow of... Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ...

Anonymous speech

In 1960, the court in Talley v. California, (362 U.S. 60) struck down a Los Angeles city ordinance that made it a crime to distribute anonymous pamphlets. Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ... Los Angeles and L.A. redirect here. ...

Flag burning

The divisive issue of flag burning as a form of protest came before the Supreme Court in 1989, as it decided Texas v. Johnson. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction of Gregory Johnson for burning the flag by a vote of five to four. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. asserted that "if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Many Congressmen criticized the decision of the Court and the House of Representatives unanimously passed a resolution denouncing the Court.^[1] Congress passed a federal law barring flag burning, but the Supreme Court struck it down as well in United States v. Eichman (1990). Many attempts have been made to amend the Constitution to allow Congress to prohibit the desecration of the flag. Since 1995, the Flag Burning Amendment has consistently mustered sufficient votes to pass in the House of Representatives, but not in the Senate. In 2000, the Senate voted 63–37 in favor of the amendment, which fell four votes short of the requisite two-thirds majority. In 2006, another attempt fell one vote short. Burning the Flag of the United States Flag desecration is a blanket term applied to various acts that intentionally deface a flag, most often a national flag (though other flags can be defaced as well). ... Holding A Texas statute that criminalized the desecration of the American flag violated the First Amendment. ... Gregory Johnson may refer to: Gregory H. Johnson (born 1962), astronaut Gregory Scott Johnson (died 2005), executed murderer See also: Greg Johnson This is a disambiguation page: a list of articles associated with the same title. ... William Joseph Brennan, Jr. ... United States vs. ... The Flag Burning Amendment (or, more properly, flag desecration amendment) is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would allow the U.S. Congress to outlaw, by statute, the physical desecration of the flag of the United States. ...

Obscenity

The federal government and the states have long been permitted to restrict obscenity or pornography. While obscenity generally has no protection under the First Amendment, pornography is subject to little regulation. The exact definition of obscenity and pornography, however, has changed over time. Obscenity in Latin obscenus, meaning foul, repulsive, detestable, (possibly derived from ob caenum, literally from filth). The term is most often used in a legal context to describe expressions (words, images, actions) that offend the prevalent sexual morality of the time. ... Porn redirects here. ...

When it decided Rosen v. United States in 1896, the Supreme Court adopted the same obscenity standard as had been articulated in a famous British case, Regina v. Hicklin. The Hicklin standard defined material as obscene if it tended "to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall." In 1957, the Court ruled in Roth v. United States that the Hicklin test was inappropriate. Instead, the Roth test for obscenity was "whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest." Holding Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, but more strictly defines what is considered obscene. Court membership Chief Justice: Earl Warren Associate Justices: Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, William O. Douglas, Harold Hitz Burton, Tom C. Clark, John Marshall Harlan II, William J. Brennan, Charles Evans Whittaker Case opinions...

In 1964 Justice Potter Stewart, in Jacobellis v. Ohio, famously stated that, although he could not precisely define pornography, "I know it when I see it." Potter Stewart (January 23, 1915 â€“ December 7, 1985) was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. ... Holding The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, protected a movie theatre manager from being prosecuted for possessing and showing a film that was not obscene. ...

The Roth test was expanded when the Court decided Miller v. California in 1973. Under the Miller test, a work is obscene if it would be found appealing to the prurient interest by an average person applying contemporary community standards, depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. Note that "community" standards—not national standards—are applied whether the material appeals to the prurient interest; thus, material may be deemed obscene in one locality but not in another. National standards, however, are applied whether the material is of value. Child pornography is not subject to the Miller test, as the Supreme Court decided in 1982. The Court felt that the government's interest in protecting children from abuse was paramount. Holding Obscene materials are defined as those that the average person, applying contemporary community standards, find, taken as a whole, appeal to the prurient interest; that depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law; and that, taken as a whole, lack serious... The Miller test is the United States Supreme Courts test for determining whether speech or expression can be labeled obscene, in which case it is not protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and can be prohibited. ... Sexual behavior is a form of physical intimacy that may be directed to reproduction (one possible goal of sexual intercourse) and/or to the enjoyment of activity involving sexual gratification. ... Child pornography refers to pornographic material depicting children. ...

Yet, personal possession of obscene material in the home may not be prohibited by law. In writing for the Court in the case of Stanley v. Georgia, Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, "if the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man sitting in his own house what books he may read or what films he may watch." It is not, however, unconstitutional for the government to prevent the mailing or sale of obscene items, though they may be viewed only in private. Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002) further upheld these rights by invalidating the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996, holding that, because the act "[ . . . ]prohibit[ed] child pornography that does not depict an actual child[ . . . ]", it was overly broad and unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote: "First Amendment freedoms are most in danger when the government seeks to control thought or to justify its laws for that impermissible end. The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought." Stanley v. ... Thurgood Marshall (July 2, 1908 â€“ January 24, 1993) was an American jurist and the first African American to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States. ... Ashcroft vs. ... This page may meet Wikipedias criteria for speedy deletion. ...

U.S. courts have upheld certain regulation of pornography. U.S. courts have found that regulation and banning pornography as a way of protecting children meets the strict scrutiny test. A zoning regulation which restricts where pornography can be viewed is valid if the purpose for the statute is based on secondary effects, the zoning is not related to the suppression of the pornographic content and the statute makes other ways of viewing the content. Strict scrutiny is the highest standard of judicial review used by courts in the United States. ...

Libel, slander, and private action

The American prohibition on defamatory speech or publications—slander and libel—traces its origins to English law. The nature of defamation law was vitally changed by the Supreme Court in 1964, while deciding New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. The New York Times had published an advertisement indicating that officials in Montgomery, Alabama had acted violently in suppressing the protests of African-Americans during the Civil Rights Movement. The Montgomery Police Commissioner, L. B. Sullivan, sued the Times for libel on the grounds that the advertisement damaged his reputation. The Supreme Court unanimously overruled the $500,000 judgment against the Times. Justice William J. Brennan suggested that public officials may sue for libel only if the publisher published the statements in question with "actual malice", a difficult standard to meet. â€œLibelâ€ redirects here. ... Holding The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, protected a newspaper from being sued for libel in state court for making false defamatory statements about the official conduct of a public official, because the statements were not made with knowing or reckless disregard for the truth. ... The New York Times is a daily newspaper published in New York City and distributed internationally. ... Coordinates: , Country State County Montgomery Incorporated December 3, 1819 Government - Mayor Bobby Bright Area - City 156. ... This article is about the U.S. State. ... William J. Brennan, official portrait, 1976. ... Actual malice in US law is defined as knowledge that the information was false or that it was published with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not. ...

The actual malice standard applies to both public officials and public figures, including celebrities. Though the details vary from state to state, private individuals normally need only to prove negligence on the part of the defendant.

In Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Association, Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970) the supreme court ruled that an article which quoted a visitor to a city council meeting who didn't like Bresler's aggressive stance in negotiating with the city as "blackmail" to not be libelous since nobody could believe anyone was claiming that Bresler had committed a crime and that the statement was essentially hyperbole, i.e. obviously an opinion. Court citation is a standard system used in common law countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters. ...

As the Supreme Court again ruled in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), opinions cannot be considered defamatory. It is thus permissible to suggest, for instance, that a lawyer is a bad one, but not permissible to declare that the lawyer is ignorant of the law: the former constitutes a statement of values, but the latter is a statement alleging a fact. Holding The First Amendment permits states to formulate their own standards of libel for defamatory statements made about private figures, as long as liability is not imposed without fault. ...

More recently, in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. 497 U.S. 1 (1990), the Supreme Court backed off from the protection from "opinion" announced in Gertz. The court in Milkovich specifically held that there is no wholesale exemption to defamation law for statements labeled "opinion," but instead that a statement must be provably false (falsifiable) before it can be the subject of a libel suit. Holding The First Amendment does not require a separate opinion privilege limiting the application of state defamation laws. ...

In 1988, Hustler Magazine v. Falwell extended the "actual malice" standard to intentional infliction of emotional distress in a ruling which protected a parodic caricature. In the ruling, "actual malice" was described as "knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard whether or not it was true." Holding The creators of parodies of public figures are protected against civil liability by the First Amendment, unless the parody includes false statements of fact made in knowing or reckless disregard of the truth. ... In contemporary usage, a parody (or lampoon) is a work that imitates another work in order to ridicule, ironically comment on, or poke some affectionate fun at the work itself, the subject of the work, the author or fictional voice of the parody, or another subject. ...

Ordinarily, the First Amendment only applies to prohibit direct government censorship. The protection from libel suits recognizes that the power of the state is needed to enforce a libel judgment between private persons. The Supreme Court's scrutiny of defamation suits is thus sometimes considered part of a broader trend in U.S. jurisprudence away from the strict state action requirement, and into the application of First Amendment principles when private actors invoke state power.

Likewise, the Noerr-Pennington doctrine is a rule of law that often prohibits the application of antitrust law to statements made by competitors before public bodies: a monopolist may freely go before the city council and urge the denial of its competitor's building permit without being subject to Sherman Act liability. This principle is being applied to litigation outside the antitrust context, including state tort suits for intentional interference with business relations and "SLAPP Suits". The Noerr-Pennington doctrine is a doctrine of United States antitrust law set forth by the United States Supreme Court in a pair of cases which suggested that under the First Amendment, it can not be a violation of the federal antitrust laws for competitors to lobby the government to... The Sherman Antitrust Act was the first government action to limit trusts (A combination of firms or corporations who agree not to lower prices below a certain rate for the purpose of reducing competition and controlling prices throughout a business or an industry). ... Strategic lawsuits against public participation, (SLAPP) refers to litigation filed by a large corporation (or in some cases, a wealthy individual) to silence a less powerful critic by so severely burdening them with the cost of a legal defense that they abandon their criticism. ...

Similarly, some states have adopted, under their protections for free speech, the Pruneyard doctrine, which prohibits private property owners whose property is equivalent to a traditional public forum (often shopping malls and grocery stores) from enforcing their private property rights to exclude political speakers and petition-gatherers. This doctrine has been rejected as a matter of federal constitutional law, but is meeting growing acceptance as a matter of state law. The PruneYard Shopping Center is a sprawling 250,000 sq. ...

Political speech

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 and related laws restricted the monetary contributions that may be made to political campaigns and expenditure by candidates. The Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of the Act in Buckley v. Valeo, decided in 1976. The Court affirmed some parts of the Act and rejected others. The Court concluded that limits on campaign contributions "serve[d] the basic governmental interest in safeguarding the integrity of the electoral process without directly impinging upon the rights of individual citizens and candidates to engage in political debate and discussion." At the same time, the Court overturned the expenditure limits, which it found imposed "substantial restraints on the quantity of political speech." Holding --- Court membership Case opinions Laws applied --- Buckley v. ...

Further rules on campaign finance were scrutinized by the Court when it determined McConnell v. Federal Election Commission in 2003. The case centered on the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, a law that introduced several new restrictions on campaign financing. The Supreme Court upheld provisions which barred the raising of soft money by national parties and the use of soft money by private organizations to finance certain election-related advertisements. At the same time, the Court struck down the "choice of expenditure" rule, which required that parties could either make coordinated expenditures for all its candidates, or permit candidates to spend independently, but not both, further stating that a "provision place[d] an unconstitutional burden on the parties' right to make unlimited independent expenditures." The Supreme Court also ruled that the provision preventing minors from making political contributions was unconstitutional, relying on the precedent on the Tinker case. For additional details, see campaign finance reform. McConnell v. ... Soft money refers to money used to advance a particular political campaign in such a manner as to skirt the legal limits on how much money individuals or organizations are allowed to contribute to political campaigns (termed hard money). ... Political campaign Part of the Politics series Politics Portal This box: Campaign finance reform is the common term for the political effort in the United States to change the involvement of money in politics, primarily in political campaigns. ...

Free speech zones are areas set aside in public places for political activists to exercise their right of free speech as an exercise of what is commonly called "TPM" or "time, place manner" regulation of speech. Free speech zones are set up by the Secret Service who scout locations near which the president is to pass or speak. Officials may target those displaying signs and escort them to the free speech zones prior to and during the event. Reporters may be barred from displaying protesters on camera or speaking to them within the zone. Protesters who refuse to go to free speech zones could be arrested and charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. In 2003, a seldom-used federal law was brought up that says that "entering a restricted area around the President of the United States" is a crime. The First Amendment zone at the 2004 Democratic Nation convention Picture taken July 21, 2004. ... The First Amendment zone at the 2004 Democratic Nation convention Picture taken July 21, 2004. ... The free speech zone at the 2004 Democratic National Convention The free speech zone at the 2004 Democratic National Convention (different angle) Free speech zones (also known as First Amendment Zones, Free speech cages, and Protest zones) are areas set aside in public places for political activists to exercise their... 2004 Democratic National Convention logo The 2004 Democratic National Convention culminated in the arrival of John Kerry on July 29 to address the delegates. ... The free speech zone at the 2004 Democratic National Convention Free speech zones (also known as First Amendment Zones or derisively as Free speech cages) are areas in the United States that are set aside for political protesters to exercise their right to free speech. ... Activism, in a general sense, can be described as involvement in action to bring about change, be it social, political, environmental, or other change. ... Freedom of speech is the right to freely say what one pleases, as well as the related right to hear what others have stated. ... Because of both the secrecy of secret services and the controversial nature of the issues involved, there is some difficulty in separating the definitions of secret service, secret police, intelligence agency etc. ... This article is about journalistic reporters. ... This article is about the photographing device. ... â€œUnlawful entryâ€ redirects here. ... This article does not cite any references or sources. ... Resisting arrest is a term used in the United States (and possibly elsewhere) to describe a criminal charge against an individual who has committed at least any one of the following acts: Eluding a police officer who is attempting to arrest the individual Using or threatening to use force against...

Involuntary commitment

A small minority has questioned whether involuntary commitment laws, when the diagnosis of mental illness leading, in whole or in part, to the commitment, was made to some degree on the basis of the speech or writings of the committed individual, violates the right of freedom of speech of such individuals. Involuntary commitment is the practice of using legal means or forms as part of a mental health law to commit a person to a mental hospital, insane asylum or psychiatric ward without their informed consent, against their will or over their protests. ... In general, diagnosis (plural diagnoses) has two distinct dictionary definitions. ... A mental illness or mental disorder refers to one of many mental health conditions characterized by distress, impaired cognitive functioning, atypical behavior, emotional dysregulation, and/or maladaptive behavior. ...

The First Amendment implications of involuntary psychiatric drugging have also been questioned. Though the District Court in Mills v. Rogers 457 U.S. 291 (1982) found that "whatever powers the Constitution has granted our government, involuntary mind control is not one of them," this finding was not of precedential value, and the Supreme Court ruling was essentially inconclusive. A 1978 District Court case, Rennie v. Klein, held that an involuntarily committed patient has the right to refuse medication. District courts are a category of courts which exists in several nations. ... Rennie v. ... Involuntary commitment is the practice of using legal means or forms as part of a mental health law to commit a person to a mental hospital, insane asylum or psychiatric ward without their informed consent, against their will or over their protests. ...

In a landmark decision, O'Connor v. Donaldson, 1975, United States Supreme Court ruled that a patient cannot be involuntarily committed without due process. The decision, as interpreted by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), means that it is unconstitutional to commit for treatment a person who is not imminently a danger to himself or others and is capable to a minimal degree of surviving on his own. This interpretation has hampered efforts to implement changes in commitment laws through out the United States, as most states insist the person meet the "imminent danger" standard, accepting the ACLU's interpretation of the Donaldson case.^[2] A landmark decision is the outcome of a legal case (often thus referred to as a landmark case) that establishes a precedent that either substantially changes the interpretation of the law or that simply establishes new case law on a particular issue. ... Holding A State cannot constitutionally confine a non-dangerous individual who is capable of surviving safely in freedom by themselves or with the help of willing and responsible family members or friends. ... The Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C. The Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C., (large image) The Supreme Court of the United States, located in Washington, D.C., is the highest court (see supreme court) in the United States; that is, it has ultimate judicial authority within the United States... In United States law, adopted from English Law, due process (more fully due process of law) is the principle that the government must respect all of a persons legal rights instead of just some or most of those legal rights when the government deprives a person of life, liberty... The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is an American organization consisting of two separate entities. ...

Memoirs of convicted criminals

In some states, there are laws prohibiting convicted criminals from publishing memoirs for profit. These laws are collectively and colloquially called Son of Sam laws, after a murderer nicknamed Son of Sam. In 1991, the Supreme Court struck down a law of this type in New York as a violation of the First Amendment in the case Simon & Schuster v. Crime Victims Board. That statute did not outlaw publication of a memoir by a convicted criminal; instead, it provided that all profits from the book were to be put in escrow for a period of time. The interest from the escrow account was used to fund the New York State Crime Victims Board — an organization that pays the medical and related bills of victims of crime. Similar laws in other states remain unchallenged. for other uses please see Crime (disambiguation) A crime is an act that violates a political or moral law. ... As a literary genre, a memoir (from the French: mÃ©moire from the Latin memoria, meaning memory) forms a subclass of autobiography, although it is an older form of writing. ... Son of Sam laws are laws designed to keep criminals from profiting from their crimes by selling their stories to publishers. ... David Falco Berkowitz (born June 1, 1953), better known by his nickname Son of Sam, is an infamous 1970s New York City serial killer who killed six people and wounded several others. ... This article is about the state. ... Holding The New York Son of Sam law violated the First Amendment. ...

Freedom of the press

Freedom of the press, like freedom of speech, is subject to restrictions on bases such as defamation law. Restrictions, however, have been struck down if they are aimed at the political message or content of newspapers. Freedom of the Press (or Press Freedom) is the guarantee by a government of free public press for its citizens and their associations, extended to members of news gathering organizations, and their published reporting. ...

In Branzburg v. Hayes (1972), the Court placed limits on the ability of the Press to refuse a subpoena from a Grand Jury based on claims of Freedom of the Press. The issue decided in the case was whether a reporter could refuse to "appear and testify before state and Federal grand juries" basing the refusal on the contention that such appearance and testimony "abridges the freedom of speech and press guaranteed by the First Amendment." The 5-4 decision was that such a protection was not provided by the First Amendment. Holding The First Amendments protection of press freedom does not give a reportorial privilege in court. ... A subpoena is a command to appear at a certain time and place to give testimony upon a certain matter. ... In the American common law legal system, a grand jury is a type of jury which determines if there is enough evidence for a trial. ...

Taxation of the press

State governments retain the right to tax newspapers, just as they may tax other commercial products. Generally, however, taxes that focus exclusively on newspapers have been found unconstitutional. In Grosjean v. American Press Co. (1936), the Court invalidated a state tax on newspaper advertising revenues. Similarly, some taxes that give preferential treatment to the press have been struck down. In 1987, for instance, the Court invalidated an Arkansas law exempting "religious, professional, trade and sports journals" from taxation since the law amounted to the regulation of newspaper content. Grosjean v. ... This article is about the U.S. State. ...

In Leathers v. Medlock (1991), the Supreme Court found that states may treat different types of the media differently, such as by taxing cable television, but not newspapers. The Court found that "differential taxation of speakers, even members of the press, does not implicate the First Amendment unless the tax is directed at, or presents the danger of suppressing, particular ideas."

Content regulation

The courts have rarely treated content-based regulation of the press with any sympathy. In Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1974), the Court unanimously struck down a state law requiring newspapers criticizing political candidates to publish their responses. The state claimed that the law had been passed to ensure press responsibility. Finding that only freedom, and not press responsibility, is mandated by the First Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled that the government may not force newspapers to publish that which they do not desire to publish. Holding The Court overturned a Florida state law requiring newspapers to allow equal access to political candidates in the case of a political editorial or endorsement content. ...

Content-based regulation of television and radio, however, have been sustained by the Supreme Court in various cases. Since there are a limited number of frequencies for non-cable television and radio stations, the government licenses them to various companies. The Supreme Court, however, has ruled that the problem of scarcity does not permit the raising of a First Amendment issue. The government may restrain broadcasters, but only on a content-neutral basis.

Petition and assembly

The right to petition the government has been interpreted as extending to petitions of all three branches: the Congress, the executive and the judiciary. The Supreme Court has interpreted "redress of grievances" broadly; thus, it is possible for one to request the government to exercise its powers in furtherance of the general public good. However, a few times Congress has directly limited the right to petition. During the 1790s, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, punishing opponents of the Federalist Party; the Supreme Court never ruled on the matter. In 1835 the House of Representatives adopted the "Gag Rule," barring abolitionist petitions calling for the end of slavery. The Supreme Court did not hear a case related to the rule, which was in any event abolished in 1844. During World War I, individuals petitioning for the repeal of sedition and espionage laws (see above) were punished; again, the Supreme Court did not rule on the matter. The right to petition is the freedom of individuals (and sometimes groups and corporations) to petition their government for a correction or repair of some form of injustice without fear of punishment for the same. ... Group of women holding placards with political activist slogans: know your courts - study your politicians, Liberty in law, Law makers must not be law breakers, and character in candidates photo 1920 Freedom of assembly is the freedom to associate with, or organize any groups, gatherings, clubs, or organizations that one... The label Federalist refers to two major groups in the history of the United States of America: (1. ... A gag rule is a rule that limits or forbids the consideration or discussion of a topic. ...

The right of assembly was originally closely tied to the right to petition. One significant case involving the two rights was United States v. Cruikshank (1876). There, the Supreme Court held that citizens may "assemble for the purpose of petitioning Congress for a redress of grievances." Essentially, it was held that the right to assemble was secondary, while the right to petition was primary. Later cases, however, have expanded the meaning of the right to assembly. Hague v. CIO (1939), for instance, refers to the right to assemble for the "communication of views on national questions" and for "disseminating information." United States v. ... HAGUE, MAYOR, ET AL. v. ...

International significance

Most provisions of the United States Bill of Rights are based on the English Bill of Rights (1689) and on other aspects of English law. The English Bill of Rights, however, does not include many of the protections found in the First Amendment. For example, while the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech to the general populace, the English Bill of Rights only protected "freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament." The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, a French revolutionary document passed only weeks before Congress proposed the Bill of Rights, contains certain guarantees that are similar to the First Amendment's. For instance, it suggests that "every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom." The Bill of Rights 1689 is an English Act of Parliament with the long title An Act Declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Settling the Succession of the Crown and known colloquially in the UK as the Bill of Rights. ... English law is a formal term of art that describes the law for the time being in force in England and Wales. ... Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen: Revolutionary patriotism borrows familiar iconography of the Ten Commandments Wikisource has original text related to this article: Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (French: La...

Freedom of speech in the United States is more extensive than nearly any other nation in the world. While the First Amendment does not explicitly set restrictions on freedom of speech, other declarations of rights sometimes do so. The European Convention on Human Rights, for example, permits restrictions "in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary," and in practice these loopholes have been interpreted quite broadly by the courts of Europe. Similarly the Indian constitution allows "reasonable" restrictions upon free speech to serve "public order, security of State, decency or morality." â€œECHRâ€ redirects here. ...

The First Amendment was one of the first guarantees of religious freedom: neither the English Bill of Rights, nor the French Declaration of Rights, contains an equivalent guarantee.

See also

A list of the American constitutional amendments, both ratified and unratified, are as follows: Ratified The first ten compose the American Bill of Rights The First Amendment - I (1791) The Second Amendment _ II (1791) Ensures the right to fom a militia. ... The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution states that: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion Together with the Free Exercise Clause, (or prohibiting the free exercise thereof), these two clauses make up what are commonly known as the religion clauses. ... The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, taken with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment make up the Religion Clauses. ... Freedom of association is a Constitutional (legal) concept based on the premise that it is the right of free adults to mutually choose their associates for whatever purpose they see fit. ... Freedom of thought (also called freedom of conscience and freedom of ideas) is the freedom of an individual to hold or consider a fact, viewpoint, or thought, regardless of anyone elses view. ... Holding For a law to be considered constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, the law must have a legitimate secular purpose, must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion, and must not result in an excessive entanglement of government and religion. ... Rationale for freedom of expression based on an analogy of communication to goods in the economic marketplace. ... // United States v. ...

Sources

External links

Categories: Spoken articles | 1791 in law | Amendments to the United States Constitution | First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution | Civil rights | Freedom of expression | Separation of church and state Image File history File links First_Amendment. ... Image File history File links Sound-icon. ... Year 2006 (MMVI) was a common year starting on Sunday of the Gregorian calendar. ... is the 181st day of the year (182nd in leap years) in the Gregorian calendar. ... Image File history File links Sound-icon. ... Wikisource has original text related to this article: The United States Constitution The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. ... The United States Constitution was written in 1787, adopted in 1788, and took effect in 1789, replacing the Articles of Confederation. ... The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, commonly known as the Articles of Confederation, was the first governing document, or constitution, of the United States of America. ... The Mount Vernon Conference was a meeting of delegates from Virginia and Maryland at George Washingtons home at Mount Vernon, Virginia in March 1785. ... The Annapolis Convention was a meeting at Annapolis, Maryland of 12 delegates from five states (New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Virginia) that called for a constitutional convention. ... Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States, by Howard Chandler Christy. ... The New Jersey Plan was a proposal for the structure of the United States Government proposed by William Paterson on June 15, 1787. ... A proposal by Virginia delegates during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, the Virginia Plan (also known as the Large State Plan) was notable for its role in setting the overall agenda for debate in the convention and, in particular, for setting forth the idea of population-weighted representation in the... The Connecticut Compromise, also known as the Great Compromise, was an essential agreement between large and small states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 that in part defined the legislative structure and representation that each state would have under the United States Constitution. ... The three-fifths compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States... Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States, by Howard Chandler Christy. ... This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedias deletion policy. ... An advertisement for The Federalist The Federalist Papers are a series of 85 articles arguing for the ratification of the United States Constitution. ... This is a listing of the Federalist Papers. ... The United States Bill of Rights consists of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. ... The first ten amendments to the United States Constitution are known as the Bill of Rights. ... This is an incomplete list of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution, in reverse chronological order. ... The United States Constitution has been amended on 18 occasionsâ€”with a total of 27 individual successful amendmentsâ€”since the Constitution was completed in 1787. ... The history of the Convention as a means of altering the fundamental law of a nation is documented in Prelude to the Grand Convention, the first chapter of a well researched book published in 1988 by Oxford University Press. ... Besides the more common method, Article V establishes the possibility of conventions within the individual states to ratify an amendment to the United States Constitution. ... Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Appointments Clause, empowers the President of the United States to appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, while granting the United States Congress... The Appropriations Clause[1] or Statement and Account Clause refers to a provision of Article I, Section 9, Clause 7, that provides Congress with the power to control the spending of the federal government and requires that records of expenditures be made. ... The case or controversy clause of Article III of the United States Constitution has been deemed to impose a requirement that United States federal courts are not permitted to hear cases that do not pose an actual controversy - that is, an actual dispute between adverse parties which is capable of... The citizenship clause (also known as the naturalization clause[1]) refers to a provision, in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution at section one, clause 1. ... Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause, states that Congress has the exclusive authority to manage trade activities between the states and with foreign nations and Indian tribes. ... The compact clause refers to a provision, in Article One of the United States Constitution at section ten, clause 3, that forbids states from entering into alliances with other states or with foreign governments. ... The Confrontation Clause of Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides in relevant part: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to . ... This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. ... Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, known as the Copyright Clause empowers the United States Congress: To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. ... In United States law, adopted from English Law, due process (more fully due process of law) is the principle that the government must respect all of a persons legal rights instead of just some or most of those legal rights when the government deprives a person of life, liberty... The Emolument clause refers to a provision in Article One of the United States Constitution at section nine, clause 8, that forbids the United States from granting titles of Nobility and restricts members of the government from receiving gifts from foreign states without the consent of Congress. ... Congressman John Bingham of Ohio was the principal framer of the Equal Protection Clause. ... The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution states that: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion Together with the Free Exercise Clause, (or prohibiting the free exercise thereof), these two clauses make up what are commonly known as the religion clauses. ... Article III Section 2 Clause 2 of the United States Constitution. ... An ex post facto law (from the Latin for from something done afterward) or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts committed or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law. ... The Extradition clause or Interstate renditon clause[1] refers to a provision in Article Four of the United States Constitution at section two, clause 2, provides for the extradition of a criminal back to the state where he or she has committed a crime. ... The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, taken with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment make up the Religion Clauses. ... The Fugitive slave clause refers to a provision in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3, that requires that slaves that escaped to another state be returned back to the owner in the state from which they escaped. ... Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, commonly known as the Full Faith and Credit Clause, addresses the duties states have to respect and enforce the judicial rulings of other states. ... Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, is known as the General Welfare Clause, the Uniformity Clause, the Welfare Clause, and the Taxing and Spending Clause. ... The Guarantee clause refers to a provision in Article IV, Section 4, Clause 1, requires the United States to provide a republican form of government for every state. ... The impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in 1999, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist presiding. ... The Militia clause refers to the provision in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, that provide Congress with the power to summon a militia. ... A natural-born citizen is a special term mentioned in the United States Constitution as a requirement for eligibility to serve as President or Vice President of the United States. ... The necessary and proper clause (also known as the elastic clause, the basket clause, the coefficient clause, and the sweeping clause [1]) refers to a provision, in Article One of the United States Constitution at section eight, clause 18, which addresses implied powers of Congress. ... The no religious test clause of the United States Constitution is cited by advocates of separation of church and state as an example of original intent of the Framers of the Constitution of avoiding any entanglement between church and state, or involving the government in any way as a determiner... The Origination clause refers to a provision in Article One of the United States Constitution at section seven, clause 1, that mandates all revenue raising bills originate from the House of Representatives. ... Presentment clause The Presentment clause (Article I, Section 7) is a clause in the United States Constitution that outlines how a bill may become law. ... The Privileges and Immunities Clause (U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1, also known as the Comity Clause) prevents states from treating citizens of other states in a discriminatory manner, with regard to basic civil rights. ... This provision of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is unique among constitutional provisions in that some scholars believe it was all but read out of the Constitution in a 5-4 decision of the Supreme Court (see Slaughterhouse Cases of 1873). ... The Speech or Debate Clause (found in Article I, Section 6, Clause 1) is a clause in the United States Constitution which states that members of both Houses of Congress Its intended purpose is to prevent a President or other officials of the Executive branch from having members arrested on... Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution is known as the Supremacy Clause: The Supremacy Clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. treaties as the supreme law of the land. ... The Suspension Clause is clause two of section nine of Article One of the United States Constitution. ... Eminent domain (U.S.), compulsory purchase (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Ireland), resumption (Australia) or expropriation (Canada, South Africa) in common law legal systems is the inherent power of the state to expropriate private property, or rights in private property, without the owners consent, either for its own use or... The Territorial Clause refers to Article IV, Section 3, paragraph 2 of United States Constitution: The interpretation of this clause gives the United States Congress the final power over every territory of the United States. ... It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Jury. ... The three-fifths compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States... The Vesting clauses refer to a provisions in Article I, Section 1; Article II, Section 1, Clause 1; and Article III, Section 1 of the United States Constitution; which vest the legislative, executive, and judicial powers in the Congress, president, and Supreme Court, respectively. ... Sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, the United States Constitution, Article One, Section 8, Clause 1, vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. ... Constitutional theory is an area of constitutional law that focuses on the underpinnings of constitutional government in the United States. ... In the United States and many commonwelth nations, concurrent powers are powers held by both the states and the federal government and may be exercised simultaneously within the same territory and in relation to the same body of citizens. ... A number of amendments to the United States Constitution include a Congressional power of enforcement. ... For other uses, see Double jeopardy (disambiguation). ... The Dormant Commerce Clause is a phrase that originated with a comment made by Chief Justice John Marshall in the case of Willson v. ... The enumerated powers are a list of specific responsibilities found in Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution, which enumerate the authority granted to the United States Congress. ... This article does not cite any references or sources. ... Incorporation of the Bill of Rights is the legal doctrine by which portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights are applied to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. ... This article needs to be cleaned up to conform to a higher standard of quality. ... We the People redirects here. ... This article is about the power of federal law in the United States. ... The separation of church and state is a legal and political principle derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . ... theSeparation of powers is a political doctrine under which the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government are kept distinct, to prevent abuse of power. ...

Contents

Text GA_googleFillSlot("encyclopedia_square");