Tomorrow / Friday..
in class assessment. You are writing out from memory The First Amendment and then responding to those guided reading questions that were handed out on Tuesday.
1. What is the First Amendment?
The First Amendment consists of the first 45 words of the Bill of Rights, ratified in December 1791, that protect the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition. It serves as the blueprint for freedom of expression and religious liberty. Apply to this current issue.
Defiant Kentucky Clerk Jailed for Refusing to Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses
Kim Davis cites ‘God’s authority’ for her actions in the face of court rulings
ASHLAND, Ky.—A federal judge jailed a Kentucky clerk on Thursday for contempt after she repeatedly defied his order to issue marriage licenses to gay and straight couples, imposing his authority in the most high-profile challenge to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage.
Kim Davis, the Rowan County clerk, had unsuccessfully appealed all the way to the high court to delay an order by the judge that she issue marriage licenses to all qualified couples, gay or heterosexual.
Ms. Davis, he said, had made clear she would continue to violate his order and that imposing fines on her would be insufficient to force her to comply. Failing to take action against Ms. Davis would set a “dangerous precedent” by allowing other people to assume they could pick and choose which court orders they would follow, Judge Bunning said.“The court does not do this lightly,” said U.S. District Judge David Bunning of the Eastern District of Kentucky. But, he said, “it’s necessary in this case.”
“Thank you, Judge,” Ms. Davis said as she was escorted from the courtroom by U.S. Marshals.
Judge Bunning said Ms. Davis would remain in jail until he is assured that his order is being implemented.
Two protestors engaged in a heated debate in front of the federal courthouse Thursday in Ashland, Ky., as Kim Davis made a court appearance. PHOTO: TY WRIGHT/GETTY IMAGES
Ms. Davis later turned down an offer by the judge to avoid being held in contempt on the condition that she agree to allow her deputies to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples. As an elected official, Ms. Davis can’t be fired. To be removed, she would have to be impeached by the state Legislature or convicted of a crime.
Ms. Davis’s case highlights the tension between a person’s right to religious expression and gay couples’ protections against discrimination. Though a handful of local officials elsewhere in Kentucky and Alabama are resisting issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, they aren’t involved in litigation, and Ms. Davis’s case has drawn the most attention.
She has argued that granting marriage licenses to gay couples would violate her Apostolic Christian beliefs. At the hearing on Thursday, Ms. Davis’s lawyers argued that she was unable to comply with Judge Bunning’s order because of her religious conviction that God defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. “She cannot do it in her conscience,” said Jonathan Christman, one of her attorneys. “It’s factually impossible.”
Kim Davis in a photo made available by the Carter County Detention Center. PHOTO: CARTER COUNTY DETENTION CENTER/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Ms. Davis took the stand and described how she had dedicated her life to God after her mother died in 2011. “I promised to love him with my whole heart, body and soul,” she said.
While she didn’t object to same-sex couples obtaining marriage certificates in other counties, she said her beliefs barred her from issuing them in her office, bearing her signature.
When a lawyer for the plaintiffs questioned her, she acknowledged that she believed God’s authority superseded the court’s authority and that she wouldn’t be dissuaded.
Her failure to comply with the judge’s order isn’t a “factual impossibility,” said William Sharp, legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which is representing the plaintiffs. “It’s unwillingness.”
Judge Bunning agreed. He said the plaintiffs had established by clear and convincing evidence that Ms. Davis “has and will continue to violate this court’s order.” He rejected her argument that it was impossible for her to comply. “She’s choosing not to do so,” he said.
Groups opposed to same-sex marriage condemned the judge’s actions. “It is outrageous to jail Kim Davis because she does not want to personally be part of certifying same-sex marriages that violate her deeply held religious beliefs,” said Brian Brown, president of the nonprofit National Organization for Marriage.
Gay-marriage supporters said the judge’s move was justified to hold Ms. Davis accountable. “This situation absolutely didn’t have to happen, if only Kim Davis followed the law,” said Sarah Warbelow, legal director at the Human Rights Campaign, an advocacy group. “Same-sex couples in Rowan County have a constitutional right to marry the person they love in the place they call home.”
As the case has progressed, some involved in it have suggested that quitting may be best course of action for Ms. Davis. In July, Gov. Steve Beshear, a Democrat, said that if a county clerk’s “personal convictions tell you that you simply cannot fulfill your duties that you were elected to do, then obviously an honorable course to take is to resign and let someone else step in.”
One of the plaintiffs, April Miller, also took the stand Thursday. A college professor who lives in Rowan County, she said she and her partner, Karen Roberts, had been together for 11 years and were elated they would finally be able to get married after the high-court ruling. But she said the couple had been rebuffed three times at Ms. Davis’s office. “We feel like this marginalizes us again,” said Ms. Miller.
After Ms. Davis was taken into custody, Judge Bunning asked six deputy clerks who work under her if they would comply with his order and issue marriage licenses in Ms. Davis’s absence. Five agreed.
The judge then raised the possibility that their compliance could result in Ms. Davis no longer being held in contempt, but only if she agreed to allow the deputies to fulfill their duties without interfering. He asked that Ms. Davis be returned to the courtroom to address the issue. Yet after a recess, one of her attorneys said she wouldn’t agree to the judge’s conditions, and she remained in custody.
The agreement by the five clerks to issue marriage licenses raised the possibility that same-sex couples in Rowan County could receive licenses as early as Friday. Judge Bunning stressed he wouldn’t tolerate any ruses by the clerk’s office to delay fulfilling his order. “I do expect compliance,” he said.
Outside the federal courthouse in Ashland, the scene was raucous. Supporters of Ms. Davis preached, played music and waved placards reading “Repent America” and “God Hates Your Sin.” Gay-marriage backers carried rainbow flags and signs reading “God Is Love” and “Equal Love Equal Rights.”
Ms. Davis—whose office hasn’t issued marriage licenses to any couples, same-sex or heterosexual, since June—has nearly exhausted her legal options. In August, Judge Bunning granted a preliminary injunction ordering her to issue licenses, in a case brought against her by four couples. But he stayed his ruling while she pursued appeals.
Last week, the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied Ms. Davis a stay of the preliminary injunction, and on Monday the Supreme Court did the same.
After Ms. Davis’s office again turned away same-sex couples seeking marriage licenses on Tuesday, the ACLU filed a motion to hold her in contempt. The plaintiffs didn’t seek to have her jailed but asked Judge Bunning to impose financial penalties, according to the filing.
On Wednesday, Ms. Davis’s attorneys at Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit firm that focuses on religious-freedom cases, filed a response to the contempt motion. They argued she was unable to comply with the judge’s order “because it irreparably and irreversibly violates her conscience.” They suggested alternatives that wouldn’t burden her religious convictions, such as deputizing a neighboring county clerk to issue licenses or distributing them through a state agency.
Ms. Davis’s lawyers also requested an injunction barring enforcement of Gov. Steve Beshear’s earlier order to the state’s county clerks that they issue licenses to all couples.
Apart from the proceedings on Judge Bunning’s order, Ms. Davis also faces possible prosecution. Last week, a gay couple who was repeatedly rebuffed by her office asked the Rowan County Attorney to charge her with official misconduct, a misdemeanor. The county attorney referred the request to Attorney General Jack Conway’s office, which said it is reviewing the matter and would soon decide whether appoint a special prosecutor.
Supreme Court Rules Against Kentucky Clerk in Gay Marriage Case
The U.S. Supreme Court late Monday rejected an appeal from a county clerk in Kentucky who said she could not issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because of her religious objections.
Kim Davis, the clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, "holds an undisputed sincerely held religious belief that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, only," her lawyers said in asking the court to block a lower court order directing her to issue the licenses.
But the Supreme Court denied her request without explanation in a brief one-line order. No dissents were noted, and the court acted without seeking a response from the state.
It was the first legal skirmish to reach the Supreme Court since it declared on June 26th that the Constitution guarantees gay couples the right to get married
2. What is .the value of the First Amendment to us and to the nation?
The First Amendment enables citizens to express their thoughts and beliefs in a free society. It allows citizens to practice whatever religion they wish — or no religion at all. Without the First Amendment, religious minorities could be persecuted, the government could establish a national religion, protesters could be silenced, the press could not criticize government and citizens could not mobilize for or against social change.
3. The First Amendment starts with the words “Congress shall make no law …” But don’t we sometimes limit First Amendment freedoms?
Yes, at times we do limit First Amendment freedoms. While the text of the First Amendment references that “Congress shall make no law,” there are some limited types of speech that do not receive free-speech protection. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously expressed this point when he wrote that “the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” Holmes’s famous phrase means that not all forms of speech are protected. For example, the First Amendment does not protect obscenity, child pornography, true threats, fighting words, incitement to imminent lawless action, criminal solicitation or defamation.
4. Does the First Amendment apply to private companies and organizations?(note this!)
No. The First Amendment applies to the government — to protect individuals from government censorship. While the text of the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech,” it means that no federal, state or local government official can infringe on your free-speech rights. A private company is not a government or state and therefore generally is not subject to the requirements of the First Amendment.
5. How does the First Amendment protect religious liberty?
It protects religious liberty through the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. The establishment clause — “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” — provides for separation between church and state. The free exercise clause — “or the free exercise thereof” — means that individuals can hold whatever beliefs they wish on religion or non-religion and to freely practice those beliefs.
It protects religious liberty through the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. The establishment clause — “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” — provides for separation between church and state. The free exercise clause — “or the free exercise thereof” — means that individuals can hold whatever beliefs they wish on religion or non-religion and to freely practice those beliefs.
6. What does the establishment clause mean?
This is a difficult question that divides legislators, educators and members of the Supreme Court. It clearly means that the government may not establish a national religion. (Can you name any countries with national religions?) It also means that the government may not pass a law that favors one religious sect or group over another. To many, it also means that the government may not pass a law that favors religion over non-religion. These individuals believe that the establishment clause erects a “wall of separation” between church and state.
This is a difficult question that divides legislators, educators and members of the Supreme Court. It clearly means that the government may not establish a national religion. (Can you name any countries with national religions?) It also means that the government may not pass a law that favors one religious sect or group over another. To many, it also means that the government may not pass a law that favors religion over non-religion. These individuals believe that the establishment clause erects a “wall of separation” between church and state.
Many agree that the establishment clause erects a degree of separation, but they simply disagree exactly how high that wall should be. Some believe that the government can acknowledge religious influences in public life. Others believe that even “In God We Trust” on money violates the church-state separation principle. Many — including Supreme Court justices — cannot agree on the constitutionality of posting Ten Commandments displays on government property.
The Pledge of Allegiance is now being said at SOTA. Please read its history. What do you think of the changes? to the Pledge? to saying it at school?
7. What is an example of an establishment of religion?
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that public school teachers cannot lead their students in prayer. The Court reasoned that teachers leading students in school would place coercive pressure upon religious minorities and make it appear that the government supported a particular religion.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that public school teachers cannot lead their students in prayer. The Court reasoned that teachers leading students in school would place coercive pressure upon religious minorities and make it appear that the government supported a particular religion.
8. What does free exercise of religion mean under the First Amendment?
It means that people have the right to freely practice their religious faith or practice no religious faith at all. It provides absolute protection for freedom of belief and a strong degree of protection for religious conduct. People can believe whatever they wish. However, sometimes the government can step in and regulate religious practices if it has a strong enough interest — called a compelling government interest — such as the protection of children.
It means that people have the right to freely practice their religious faith or practice no religious faith at all. It provides absolute protection for freedom of belief and a strong degree of protection for religious conduct. People can believe whatever they wish. However, sometimes the government can step in and regulate religious practices if it has a strong enough interest — called a compelling government interest — such as the protection of children.
9. Does the First Amendment apply to schools?
Yes. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District that students do not “shed” their free-speech rights “at the schoolhouse gate.” This means that public school students retain some level of free-expression rights, even during the school day.
Yes. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District that students do not “shed” their free-speech rights “at the schoolhouse gate.” This means that public school students retain some level of free-expression rights, even during the school day.
10. Do students have the same level of First Amendment rights as adults?
No. The Supreme Court also said that students’ rights must be considered against the “special characteristics of the school environment.” Speech that substantially disrupts school activities, for example, is not protected by the First Amendment.
No. The Supreme Court also said that students’ rights must be considered against the “special characteristics of the school environment.” Speech that substantially disrupts school activities, for example, is not protected by the First Amendment.
11. Is speech on the Internet entitled to as much protection as speech in more traditional media?
Yes. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Reno v. ACLU that speech on the Internet receives the highest level of First Amendment protection. The Supreme Court explained that “our cases provide no basis for qualifying the level of First Amendment scrutiny that should be applied to this medium.” This was an important ruling, because the government had argued that speech on the Internet could be controlled to a greater extent, just like the broadcast medium. Several civil liberties groups countered that speech on the Internet should be free and open and entitled to just as much protection as the print medium.
Yes. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Reno v. ACLU that speech on the Internet receives the highest level of First Amendment protection. The Supreme Court explained that “our cases provide no basis for qualifying the level of First Amendment scrutiny that should be applied to this medium.” This was an important ruling, because the government had argued that speech on the Internet could be controlled to a greater extent, just like the broadcast medium. Several civil liberties groups countered that speech on the Internet should be free and open and entitled to just as much protection as the print medium.
12. May students pray or discuss religion in public schools?
Yes, students have the right to pray and discuss religion in school. Public misperception has persisted on this topic since the U.S. Supreme court struck down school-sponsored prayer in the early 1960s. In those decisions, the high court ruled that the establishment clause does prohibit schools from allowing or engaging in school-sponsored prayer or encouraging students to pray.
But the free exercise clause protects the rights of students to pray on their own time. In fact, singling out student religious speech for punishment would indicate hostility toward religion and violate the basic First Amendment principle that the government may not punish a particular viewpoint.
This does not mean that students have an unfettered right to speak on religious subjects. Students can be punished for interrupting class time for any type of speech. Also, school officials can make sure that students are not speaking to an audience that is forced to hear them, or that they are harassing others by over zealously advocating their religious beliefs.
13. Does freedom of the press mean the news media can write or say anything they want?
Unless restricted by a valid prior restraint — which is rare — the news media are free to publish any information or opinion they desire. This freedom, however, does not immunize them from liability for what they publish. A newspaper that publishes false information about a person, for example, can be sued for libel. A television station similarly can be sued if it broadcasts a story that unlawfully invades a person’s privacy. Because such liability can be staggering, most journalists strive to exercise their freedom to publish in a responsible and ethical manner.
14. Is truth a defense in libel lawsuits?
Truth is an absolute defense against libel claims, because one of the elements that must be proven in a defamation suit is falsity. If a statement is true, it cannot be false, and therefore there is no prima facie case of defamation. There are numerous jurisdictions, including Florida, that have adopted the substantial-truth doctrine, which offers protection to a defendant of a defamation claim as long as the “gist” of the story is true.
15. What difference does it make in defamation if a person is a public official?
It makes a huge difference, because public officials and public figures have a much higher burden of proof to prove defamation than do private persons. In the 1964 ruling New York Times v. Sullivan, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements regarding public officials, unless the statement was made with actual malice — “with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it was true or false.” The Court set a new standard by requiring that a public-official defamation plaintiff show evidence of actual malice by clear and convincing evidence. If the plaintiff is a private person, then he or she generally only needs to show that the defamer was at fault — or negligent — in making the statement.
16. Why are public officials and public figures treated differently in defamation* law?
* action of damaging the good reputation of someone; slander or libel.
The reason for the distinction between public and private figures is that public officials often have greater access to channels of communication to counteract false statements. If a celebrity is defamed, he or she can call a press conference and rebut the statement. If a private person is defamed, he or she usually doesn’t have nearly the same level of access.
17. What is indecent speech?
Indecent speech generally refers to speech that is of a sexual or vulgar nature but does not cross the line into unprotected obscenity, or even material that is “harmful to minors.” Indecent speech is protected speech for adults, but often can be regulated for minors, particularly younger minors. Under rules of the Federal Communications Commission, broadcast indecency is “language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities.” By “contemporary community standards,” the FCC means the standard “of an average broadcast viewer or listener and not the sensibilities of any individual complainant.”
18. What is the difference between the freedom of assembly and the freedom of association?
Freedom of assembly is explicitly guaranteed in the First Amendment, securing the right of people to meet for any purpose connected with government. Freedom of association protects the activities and composition of such meetings. This right is not explicitly set out in the Constitution but is instead derived from fundamental privacy interests and the rights of speech, petition and assembly.
Freedom of assembly is explicitly guaranteed in the First Amendment, securing the right of people to meet for any purpose connected with government. Freedom of association protects the activities and composition of such meetings. This right is not explicitly set out in the Constitution but is instead derived from fundamental privacy interests and the rights of speech, petition and assembly.
19. How has freedom of assembly helped society?
Freedom of assembly was the essential freedom in the women’s suffrage movement of the 1910s and the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. These protesters — often in the face of public scorn and official arrest — braved the streets and sidewalks to denounce policies and to advocate positions that placed them in direct opposition to official authorities. Freedom of assembly enables people to gather together to make a powerful statement, a statement much more potent than anyone could make as a single individual.
Freedom of assembly was the essential freedom in the women’s suffrage movement of the 1910s and the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. These protesters — often in the face of public scorn and official arrest — braved the streets and sidewalks to denounce policies and to advocate positions that placed them in direct opposition to official authorities. Freedom of assembly enables people to gather together to make a powerful statement, a statement much more potent than anyone could make as a single individual.
20. What is petitioning?
Historically, a petition was a written request stating a grievance and requesting relief from a ruling authority, such as a king. In modern America, petitioning embraces a range of expressive activities designed to influence public officials through legal, nonviolent means.
Historically, a petition was a written request stating a grievance and requesting relief from a ruling authority, such as a king. In modern America, petitioning embraces a range of expressive activities designed to influence public officials through legal, nonviolent means.
21. What does the petition clause of the First Amendment guarantee?
Courts seldom address the petition clause in isolation, instead grouping it with other rights to free association and collective speech. The U.S. Supreme Court has noted that the right to petition at least provides the opportunity to institute non-frivolous lawsuits and mobilize popular support to change existing laws in a peaceful manner.Take a look at religion around the world. The following information comes from the New World Encyclopedia.
Consider how having a state religion has impacted and considers to impact society?
Christianity
The following states give some official recognition to some form of Christianity although the actual legal status varies considerably:
Roman Catholic
Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Germany, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, Slovakia, some cantons of Switzerland, and Vatican City.
Eastern Orthodox
Lutheran
Anglican
Reformed
Scotland and some cantons of Switzerland.
Old Catholic
Some cantons of Switzerland.
Islam
Countries where Islam is the official religion: Afghanistan, Algeria (Sunni), Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Comoros (Sunni), Egypt, Iran (Shi'a), Iraq, Jordan(Sunni), Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia (Sunni), Maldives, Mauritania (Sunni),Morocco, Oman, Pakistan (Sunni), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (Sunni), Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, and Russia where it one of four recognized religions.
Judaism
Buddhism
Bhutan, Cambodia, Russia (Kalmykia is a Buddhist republic within the Russian Federation), Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tibet Government in Exile (Gelugpa school of Tibetan Buddhism).
Hinduism
Nepal was once the world's only Hindu state, but has ceased to be so following a declaration by the Parliament in 2006.
States without an official religion
These states do not profess any state religion, and are generally secular or laist. Countries which do not have an officially recognized religion include: Australia, Azerbaijan, Canada, Chile, Cuba, China, France, India, Ireland, Jamaica,Japan[3], Kosovo[4], Lebanon[5], Mexico, Montenegro, Nepal[6], New Zealand, Nigeria, North Korea, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, United States, Venezuela, Vietnam.
No comments:
Post a Comment