112414 Lecturer free speech that should not be protected protesting soldiers

112414 lecturer free speech that should not be

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 3 pages.

11/24/14 Lecturer: free speech that should not be protected: protesting soldier’s funerals Skokie v. Nat’l Socialist Party of America (1978) Illinois Supreme Court A. Background: o The village of Skokie has many Jewish residents o Nazis want to march through village wearing party uniform, display swastikas, & distribute pamphlets B. The Circuit Court issued the following injunctions against: o 1. Marching walking while wearing the party uniform o 2. Displaying the swastika o 3. Distributing pamphlets relating racial hatred C. Appellate Court modified the injunction, allowing the marching and pamphlets, but upholding (2) and denied the display of the swastika D. The Skokie Case o 1. Precedents: Cohen v. Ca (1971) a. Cohen v. Ca (1971)
Image of page 1
b. Chaplinski v. New Hampshire (1942) allows restrictions of speech acts designed to cause violence. The “fighting words” doctrine. c. Rockwell v. Morris (1961) swastika display is symbolic political speech, which, while offensive, does not constitute fighting words o 2. Conclusion: First amendment gives the Nazi rights to all three actions. The injunctions are unconstitutional. o 3. Evaluation- Lecturer does not dispute the decision because he believes in free speech. However, it’s not the law and precedence.
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 3 pages?

  • Spring '08
  • LEON
  • First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Lecturer, Skokie

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture