The Court ruled that a Massachusetts law which makes it a crime to stand on a public road or sidewalk within thirty-five feet of a reproductive health care facility violates the First Amendment. The Court held that regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services, as applied to closely held corporations, requiring employers to provide their female employees with no-cost access to contraception violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Court held that an Arkansas prison policy that prevents a Muslim prisoner from growing a half-inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The Court held that Florida’s ban on the personal solicitation of campaign funds by candidates for judgeships does not violate the First Amendment. The Court held that the Third Circuit’s instruction of only negligence in the communication of a threat was not sufficient to support a conviction under 18 U.S.C. The Court held that a municipality’s sign code provision that imposed more stringent restrictions on signs directing the public to a meeting of a non – profit group were considered to be content – based regulations of speech that couldn’t survive strict scrutiny. The Court held that the government of Texas was entitled to reject a proposal for a license plate featuring a Confederate battle flag, as Texas’s specialty license plate designs constitute government speech. The Court ruled that a public employee would be protected under the first amendment if an employer issued a demotion to limit their speech. The Court did not determine whether or not this particular law violated the First Amendment it remanded the case to the lower court to answer that question. The Court found that a New York law that prohibits surcharges on credit card transactions (but allows businesses to offer discounts for customers who pay with cash) is a regulation of speech, not just conduct, because such a law regulates how businesses communicate prices to their customers. The Court ruled that excluding religious organizations from otherwise neutral and secular and aid programs violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.Įxpressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman(PDF) Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. The Court ruled that a North Carolina law prohibiting registered sex offenders from accessing social media violates the First Amendment, due to the prominence of social media in modern communication. The Court held that a provision of trademark law that prohibits trademarks that disparage the members of a racial or ethnic group violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment The Court recognized that arrests can have a chilling effect on speech and found that an arrest can be an act of unlawful retaliation by the government, even if it had “probable cause” at the moment for making the arrest. The Court struck down a law prohibiting individuals from wearing political apparel at or near polling places. The Court found that mandatory union fees for public sector employees violate the First Amendment, even if just for collective bargaining services. The Court ruled that a Californoa law violated the First Amendment by requiring “pro-life” pregnancy centers to provide notices about the availability of abortion services. National Institute of Family Life Advocates v. The Court found that the Trump Administration can implement an immigration ban despite evidence that the ban was originally constructed with an intent to discriminate against Muslims. The Court’s ruling had the effect of permitting a baker to refuse to make a cake for a gay wedding, but only because the Colorado Civil Rights Commission seemed hostile towards religion. The Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims (based on allegations that voting maps drawn by state legislatures violated First and Fourteenth Amendment rights) are not justiciable because they present a political question beyond the reach of the federal courts. The Court held that the presence of probable cause defeats a First Amendment retaliatory-arrest claim under 42 U.S.C. The Court held that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on the federal registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” marks, in Section 2(a), violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The Court held that the display and maintenance of a large memorial cross by a local government does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The following is a list of all Supreme Court cases since the 2000-2001 term that have involved the First Amendment.Īmerican Legion v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |