100%(2)2 out of 2 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 3 pages.
11/24/14Lecturer: free speech that should not be protected: protesting soldier’s funeralsSkokie v. Nat’l Socialist Party of America (1978) Illinois Supreme CourtA. Background:oThe village of Skokie has many Jewish residentsoNazis want to march through village wearing party uniform, display swastikas, & distribute pamphletsB. The Circuit Court issued the following injunctions against:o1. Marching walking while wearing the party uniformo2. Displaying the swastikao3. Distributing pamphlets relating racial hatredC. Appellate Court modified the injunction, allowing the marching and pamphlets, but upholding (2) and denied the display of the swastikaD. The Skokie Caseo1. Precedents: Cohen v. Ca (1971)a. Cohen v. Ca (1971)
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 wordso2. Conclusion: First amendment gives the Nazi rights to all three actions. The injunctions are unconstitutional. o3. Evaluation- Lecturer does notdispute the decision because he believes in free speech. However, it’s not the law and precedence.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 3 pages?
First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Lecturer, Skokie