Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Lamb's Chapel V. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 113 S. Ct. 2141 (1993), John E. Burgess
Lamb's Chapel V. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 113 S. Ct. 2141 (1993), John E. Burgess
Vanderbilt Law Review
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides the primary foundation for the protection of several individual rights, including free speech and religious autonomy.' At times, how- ever, efforts to protect these rights appear to conflict with competing restraints on state action. The drafters of the First Amendment's Religion Clauses, for example, sought to guarantee religious freedom while maintaining a separation between church and state. The goal or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances."
R.A.V. V. City Of St. Paul: The Continuing Confusion Of The Fighting Words Doctrine, Melody L. Hurdle
R.A.V. V. City Of St. Paul: The Continuing Confusion Of The Fighting Words Doctrine, Melody L. Hurdle
Vanderbilt Law Review
Communication contributes to the marketplace of ideasI which is the only way to promote the discovery of truth in society. The importance of communication has led the United States Supreme Court to herald freedom of expression as "the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom." Indeed, the Court protects few other constitutional rights with such fervor. First Amendment protection is not absolute, however, and the United States Supreme Court consistently has asserted that certain forms or classes of expression may be regulated without violating the Constitution. Generally speaking, the Court has carved exceptions to First Amendment …
A Precarious Path: The Bill Of Rights After 200 Years, Tony A. Freyer
A Precarious Path: The Bill Of Rights After 200 Years, Tony A. Freyer
Vanderbilt Law Review
The Bill of Rights occupies an ambiguous place in American society. Americans favor the Bill of Rights in principle, but when asked whether they support particular rights guarantees for real-life practices such as gun ownership, capital punishment, abortion, and flag burning, Americans fervently and profoundly disagree. The essays David J. Bodenhamer and James W. Ely, Jr. have compiled in The Bill of Rights in Modern America After 200 Years, richly suggest why Americans have reconciled principle and practice with such difficulty. Written for a popular audience by specialists who possess a profound knowledge of and differing views concerning the technical …