JOURN 4000 1st Edition Lecture 14Outline of Last LectureI. School lawOutline of Current LectureI. Exercising rightsa. Mike Brown caseb. Public forumsc. Abortion cases Current LectureExercising rights-First Amendment right to free expression, to association-Under that is the right to protestMichael Brown- Jury will decide if policeman should stand trial-Grand jury is being recorded -Usually secret-Prosecutor might release audioJournalists covering Mike Brown caseResisting arrest- if you have your civil rights violated, 42 US C Section 1983 cause of action-Resisting arrest is illegal no defense for it-Government may restrict time, place, and manner of expression-1st Amendment means the government has no power to restrict because of message, content, etc.--> content control-Has to be non-discriminatory These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.Public forums:-Must rights if an area has been designated a public forum -Right to require parade permits-Can’t be a discriminatory policy-Civil Rights March on Washington under injunction not to do so-You may not violate a court order bottom line contempt of court-Have to appeal and get another court to overturn decision-Ordinance? Can violate an ordinance/legislative act Abortion protests- Pro-Life Anderson name legally changed, protests -How to protect rights of people like Anderson and women1988- Frisby vs. Schultz -Starts as a protest in Milwaukee-Protestors target home of doctor providing abortions town decided to support doctor-Ordinance said that all picketing that targets a home can be banned-Protection of home and peace and privacy-Also, public safety -Supreme Court ruled against the picketers-SC said ordinance was content neutral -Narrowly tailored? Restriction doesn’t go any further than is necessary? Court asking if there are alternatives for getting out your message -Ordinance only prohibits picketing that targets a specific residence -Ordinance serves a significant government interest -Sanctity of the home -Captive audience Can’t escape the message, court normally says move, but home is the ultimate escape from a message, ultimate retreatMadeson Case- abortion clinic-36 foot buffer zone around clinic entrance -Signs are ok, but there is zero tolerance for threats-Buffer zones -Wichita 2009- doctor shot and killed Nuremberg files-provided home addresses of abortion providers in the US -Many on the list have been killed 18 United States Code Section 248- no one can interfere with reproductive health services -Threat of force what reasonable person considers a reasonable threat -Court did not tell ACLA to take website down is allowed -Michael Campbell first person tried under Title 18 (Section 875)-Government need only to prove that defendant intentionally transmitted communication in interstate commerce, and circumstances were as such that a reasonable person would consider it a threat -General intent crime don’t have to have the intent to carry out, just to transit the communication Boos vs. Berry- Ordinance prohibited display of negative signs concerning foreign governments within 500 feet of their embassy-Strict scrutiny test- narrowly tailored, substantial government interest (Russia and Nicaragua in this case)-SC dignity interest, law is a violation of 1st Amendment, content based
View Full Document