Fluent Essays

Please view the attached file and answer the following questions.                        Questions Distinguish between civil liberties and civil rights. Understand the basis for selective incorporation and its relationship to landmark court cases. Identify the origin of the right to privacy and its application to landmark court cases. Identify the two clauses that comprise freedom of religion. Explain the free exercise clause as it relates to freedom of religion. Explain the establishment clause as it relates to freedom of religion, including Lemon v. Kurtzman. Understand the “clear and present danger” doctrine as it relates to Constitutional rights and liberties. Identify unprotected speech, including libel, slander, and obscenity (Miller test). Relate “prior restraint” as it relates to freedom of the press. Identify key criminal justice rights including Mapp (exclusionary rule), Miranda, Gideon, and Furman. Chapter Four: Civil Liberties Note: Students will click on right arrow at the bottom left of the slide to advance to the next slide. Then, students will click on the icon to play the audio for that slide. Image: colorado911visibility.org LO26 Distinguish Between Civil Liberties and Civil Rights Civil Liberties - A legally protected freedom to act or not to act or to be free from government interference which may or may not be written down (“penumbra”). Civil Rights - Legal protections which are largely found in the 5th, 10th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. LO27 – Understand the Basis for Selective Incorporation and its Relationship to Landmark Court Cases Barron v. Baltimore \ Two PRE-Selective Palko v. Connecticut / Incorporation cases (Bill of Rights DOESN’T apply to the STATES) ____________________________________________________ Selective Incorporation = Case by case, parts of the Bill of Rights are applied to the states. Gitlow v. New York: First case to “selectively incorporate” a piece of the Bill of Rights to the states. LO28 – Identify the Origin of the Right to Privacy and its Application to Landmark Court cases Griswold v. Connecticut: First case to establish a right to be “left alone.” Roe v. Wade: Based on a trimester (pregnancy) basis. Key is the “point of viability.” After this point, the right to an abortion exists ONLY if the mother’s physical health is jeopardized by the pregnancy. Webster: Moved the “point of viability” up to the 20th week. Demonstrates the “flaw” in Roe’s legal standard. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: States could institute limits on privacy. Rejected Roe’s trimester framework. Lawrence v. Texas: Same sex couples have a privacy right Drug Testing, the Right to Die, and Other Privacy Rights LO29 & 30 – Identify the Two Clauses that Comprise Freedom of Religion “Wall of Separation:” Clear division between government and the church. This is not the religious standard but an idea. Two Constitutional elements in the First Amendment: Free Exercise: Method of practice B. Establishment: Government cannot “sponsor” one religion as “official.” State Individual Test = Significant Burden & Compelling State Interest LO31 – Explain the Establishment Clause as it Relates to Freedom of Religion, including Lemon v. Kurtzman: Establishment: Government cannot “sponsor” one religion as “official.” TEST: Lemon v. Kurtzman 3 “pronged” test (Christmas scenes): Secular (non-religious) purpose? Advance or Inhibit? Excessive Entanglement? LO32 – Understand the “Clear and Present Danger” Doctrine as it Relates to Constitutional Rights and Liberties: Balancing test (also known as the “Sliding scale” test). Established in the case Schenck v. U.S.: Bad Tendency = Speech protected Clear & Present Danger/Incitement = Speech Prohibited LO33 – Identify Unprotected Speech, including Libel, Slander, and Obscenity: Slander: False speech which is spoken. Libel: False speech which is written down. Public figures are held to a higher standard – “Malice” or “A Reckless Disregard for the Truth” LO33 – Identify Unprotected Speech, including Libel, Slander, and Obscenity (Continued): Unprotected Speech: Obscenity Established by the case Miller v. California: 3 part/pronged test (must fail ALL the parts to violate): Would the “average person” applying “contemporary community standards” find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest? Does the work, taken as a whole, depict or describe in a patently offensive way sexual conduct specifically prohibited by state law? Does the work, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (LAPS test)? LO34 – Relate “Prior Restraint” as it Relates to Freedom of the Press Prior Restraint: Attempting to prevent the press from printing, publishing or airing material before it occurs (censorship). LO35 – Identify Key Criminal Rights Including Mapp, Gideon, and Furman Mapp v. Ohio – Established the Exclusionary Rule, a ruling that evidence obtained in an illegal manner may not be introduced at trial. Miranda v. Arizona – A set of rights that police are required to inform suspects of, including the right to remain silent. Gideon v. Wainwright – The Sixth Amendment requires that defense counsel be provided for those who cannot afford one. Furman v. Georgia – Prevented death penalty executions because vague state standards produced different, and unequal, outcomes.