![]() For instance, a restaurant is within its rights to put up a sign saying, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service." Similarly, individual states and cities can set their own public nudity and decency laws that dictate what people can legally wear or not wear in public. ![]() The Supreme Court has ruled that private property owners can kick people off the premises for wearing an offensive T-shirt or no shirt at all. Here again, our First Amendment freedoms are limited by location. So if you're free to express yourself through your clothes, what about clothing that's offensive, revealing or nonexistent? Although the First Amendment doesn't mention "freedom of expression" by name, the courts often lumps together the freedoms of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition as forms of expression. ![]() Journalists continue to lobby for a national shield law to safeguard reporters against the very real threat of imprisonment for protecting a source.įashion is a wonderful example of free expression. In 2005, that ruling was reaffirmed when Judith Miller, a reporter for The New York Times, spent 85 days in jail after refusing to name a confidential source who had leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer - itself a federal crime. states have passed shield laws that protect journalists from having to reveal their sources, but the federal government offers no such protection.īack in 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that a reporter had to testify before a grand jury if he or she witnessed a crime. In some cases, this involves an inside source that "leaks" the information under the condition of anonymity. But if reporters are to do their jobs well, they need avenues for acquiring sensitive or confidential information. The Founding Fathers viewed a free press as one of the most effective political watchdogs. Instead, a democratic system relies on the voters to remove officials who are unresponsive to public opinion. But nothing in the First Amendment - or anywhere else in the Constitution - requires that the government answer those requests or even read them. Every government office, including the White House, has e-mail addresses and phone numbers to submit comments and questions. To comply with the First Amendment right to petition, government entities and agencies must provide a way to contact them. Whether or not that official actually listens, well, that's another story. The right and ability to complain to government officials is a critical function of a representative democracy. Hidden among the more prominent rights guaranteed by the First Amendment is the right to "petition the government for a redress of grievances." Despite its low profile, the right to petition has a long and honored pedigree dating back to the Magna Carta in 1215. If the defamed person is a public figure (like a politician or celebrity), the libelous statement must be made with "actual malice," meaning it wasn't an "honest mistake," but a conscious decision to publish a lie. The statement must be published, false and "injurious" (proven damage to reputation). Over the years, the courts have established some tests for defamation. Written defamation is called libel, and spoken defamation is called slander. Defamation is speech that is both false and damaging to someone's reputation. This is where defamation laws come into play. Journalists - including bloggers and other online writers - enjoy strong protections under the First Amendment, but does that mean you can publish absolutely anything? A free and unobstructed press provides a powerful check on government corruption. In a 1786 letter to a friend, Thomas Jefferson wrote that "our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost". America is still a "free country," but you might be surprised how many rights are absolutely not granted by the First Amendment. The Bill of Rights (which encapsulates the first 10 amendments to the Constitution) became law in 1791, but the broad freedoms outlined in the First Amendment have been refined by centuries of court rulings, including many historic Supreme Court decisions. Recently freed from a tyrannical king, the American people wanted a limited government with strong protections for personal freedoms and political dissent. The Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution in 1787, but the states refused to ratify it without a Bill of Rights explicitly saying what the new government could and could not do. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |