DOC 2 Smith Debate

DOC 2 Smith Debate - Ng 1 Sharon Ng Professor Skrentny, TA...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ng Sharon Ng Professor Skrentny, TA Megan Strom DOC 2 – C06 22 February 2011 Because Smith does not maliciously disturb the peace of a neighborhood by invoking violence, he should be able to wear his shirt that represents his feelings about Governor Brown. The Elected Official Safety Act is unconstitutional because it not only places a heavier limit on expression than necessary; it is also violating Smith’s rights to free speech and expression guaranteed by the First Amendment. I. The Elected Official Safety Act does not pass the O’Brien test, so it is deemed unconstitutional. “O’Brien nonetheless argues that the 1965 Amendment is unconstitutional in its application to him, and is unconstitutional as enacted because what he calls the ‘purpose’ of Congress was to ‘suppress freedom of speech’” (O’Brien 218). - O’Brien argues that the 1965 Amendment is unconstitutional when applied to him because it breaks one of the four rules of the O’Brien test. The purpose is not ideal for the common people; rather, it suppresses the freedom of speech. - The Elected Official Safety Act is not constitutional because the law does not really achieve any significant role and it is stopping people from communicating their true opinions, which is bad. The limit on expression is also greater than necessary because not only is Smith getting punished for what he did, his rights to free speech and expression guaranteed by the 1 st Amendment are being violated. - The law does not achieve any substantial role and in fact, it is stopping people from communicating what they want/feel. The limit on expression is also greater than necessary; not only is Smith getting punished, his rights to free speech and expression guaranteed by the First Amendment are being violated. II. Smith should be able to wear his shirt because it is his way of expressing his discontent with Governor Brown, and prohibiting him from doing so would be a violation of 1 st and 14 th Amendment. “The State certainly lacks power to punish Cohen for the underlying content of the message the inscription conveyed. At least so long as there is no showing of an intent to incite disobedience to or disruption of the draft, Cohen could not, consistently with the First and Fourteenth
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 3

DOC 2 Smith Debate - Ng 1 Sharon Ng Professor Skrentny, TA...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online