Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Major Problem In The Case: The major problem was that The Communications Decency Act was an attempt to protect minors (under 18) from explicit material on the Internet. The ACLU argued that certain parts of the act were facially unconstitutional and sought a preliminary injunction preventing the government from enforcing those provisions.
How: The Court's decision gave people free speech back. ACLU stated, "It's particularly important for high school journalists and their advisers. Only by allowing student reporters open access to information -- on the Internet and elsewhere -- can we help them develop the skills they need to be critical thinkers and to communicate important information to their teen audiences. With skilled journalism teachers guiding them, they not only will be able to explore topics and gather facts vital to their lives, but they will experience first-hand the value the First Amendment offers all citizens. Even those who will not follow a career in journalism will benefit by learning to be better media consumers".
Amendment: First Amendment
How it was violated: This Amendment was violated because the Communication Decency Act, which was made to regulate all the internet porn, violated the right to freedom of speech.
Name: Reno v. American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU)
When: This case was argued on
March19, 1997, and decided on
June 26, 1997.
Story: This was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the First Amendment rights of public employees.
How Is It Relevant: The Police Department in Paterson, New Jersey said, "The Constitution prohibits a government employer from discharging or demoting an employee because the employee supports a particular political candidate". Both of these cases involve the First Amendment and not following what is written.
Quote From Judge: "Notwithstanding the legitimacy and importance of the congressional goal of protecting children from harmful materials, we agree with the three judge District Court that the statute abridges "the freedom of speech" protected by the First Amendment" ( Justice John Paul Stevens ).