In order to maintain our reputation and avoid potential legal issues relevant to our business, I am writing to further inform you on the current American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority case. This specific case involves the 1st Amendment right of freedom of speech on public transportation advertisements. The 1st Amendment although it protects freedom on speech, it allows government restrictions on the type, location, or manner of expression (Cohen, D.. (1978). Advertising & the First Amendment. Journal of Marketing, 42(3), 59–68. http://doi.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.2307/1250535). The AFDI, a human rights organization aimed to stop the spread of Islam, filed suit against MBTA, a mass transit system …show more content…
MBTA aims to increase revenue through advertisements, while setting guidelines on these advertisements in order to maintain an environment that is safe and reliant. By maintaining this inviting environment, they hope to increase the number of people that use these forms of transportation and in turn, also increasing revenue (American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. 16 June 2014. Print.). MBTA’s guidelines clearly reflect our own company’s goals for advertising. However, MBTA specifically includes in their guidelines that advertisements cannot be demeaning or disparaging. As you know, we do not have this specific language included in our policy. When the AFDI submitted three different advertisements with content involving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, MBTA’s advertising agent decided two out of the three advertisements contained demeaning or disparaging material and therefore, could not be displayed. Because of this, the issue that prompted AFDI to file suit, involves the question of whether or not MBTA should be allowed to deny advertisements as they see fit by following the guidelines outlined in their advertising policy. I think that the MBTA failed to take preventative measures that could have spared them from a suit like this one. …show more content…
The MBTA’s policy has created guidelines that are susceptible to the viewpoint discrimination that is present in their actions against AFDI. Viewpoint discrimination occurs when the government “allows speech that adopts one point of view while prohibiting speech that takes the contrary position.” (Greenawalt, K.. (1996). Viewpoints from Olympus. Columbia Law Review, 96(3), 697–709. http://doi.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.2307/1123260) The vague and ambiguous language that determines the application of the policy and ultimately whether or not an advertisement can be displayed lacks consistency necessary for fair application. The reasoning for this concludes “the absence of clear standards guiding the discretion of the public official vested with the authority to enforce the enactment invited abuse by enabling the official to administer the policy on the basis of impermissible factors” (American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. 16 June 2014. Print.) In short, viewpoint often fills the gaps where the policy’s language leaves room for arbitrary application. The second area in the case where MBTA’s ambiguous policy standards create viewpoint discrimination is when the AFDI had to change the language of their
In the controversial court case, McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall’s verdict gave Congress the implied powers to carry out any laws they deemed to be “necessary and proper” to the state of the Union. In this 1819 court case, the state of Maryland tried to sue James McCulloch, a cashier at the Second Bank of the United States, for opening a branch in Baltimore. McCulloch refused to pay the tax and therefore the issue was brought before the courts; the decision would therefore change the way Americans viewed the Constitution to this day.
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
Adair v. U.S. and Coppage v. Kansas became two defining cases in the Lochner era, a period defined after the Supreme Court’s decision in Lochner v New York, where the court adopted a broad understanding of the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. In these cases the court used the substantive due process principle to determine whether a state statute or state’s policing power violated an individual’s freedom of contract. To gain a better understanding of the court’s reasoning it is essential to understand what they disregarded and how the rulings relate to the rulings in Plessy v. Ferguson, Lochner v. New York and Muller v. Oregon.
McCulloch v Maryland 4 Wheat. (17 U.S.) 316 (1819) Issue May Congress charter a bank even though it is not an expressly granted power? Holding Yes, Congress may charter a bank as an implied power under the “necessary and proper” clause. Rationale The Constitution was created to correct the weaknesses of the Articles. The word “expressly” particularly caused major problems and therefore was omitted from the Constitution, because if everything in the Constitution had to be expressly stated it would weaken the power of the Federal government.
Justice Jackson's disagreement on the ruling of the Terminiello case is supported by many historical examples which demonstrate that freedom of speech is not an absolute right under the law. Although Terminiello had a right to exercise his right under the First Amendment, had the majority carefully considered this principle it should have rejected his claim. In this case, the majority's treatment of Terminiello's case skirted the real issue and did not benefit from true constitutional interpretation.
Tedford, Thomas L., and Dale A. Herbeck. Freedom of Speech in the United States. State College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc., 2009. Tinker V. Des Moines Independent Community School District. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. .
The case, R. v. Keegstra, constructs a framework concerning whether the freedom of expression should be upheld in a democratic society, even wh...
Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”. Although this amendment gave people the right express thier opinions, it still rests in one’s own hands as how far they will go to exercise that right of freedom of speech.
On February 11, 1983 Robert Augustus Harper, Jr., filed Amicus Curiae on the case of Joyce Bernice Hawthorne v. State of Florida, 740 So.2d. 770. This was the third appearance of Hawthorne in the First District Court of Appeal of Florida for First degree murder, second degree murder and now manslaughter.
Free speech at public universities and colleges is the most clear and the most contradictory of constitutional pr...
McKenna, George, and Stanley Feingold. "Does Affirmative Action Advance Racial Equality?" Taking Sides. 18th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2013. N. pag. Print.
ProQuest Staff. “First Amendment Rights Timeline.” Leading Issues Timelines. 2013: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web 04 Dec 2013
Stuart v. Nappi was class lawsuit Stuart’s mother filed against school personnel and the Danbury Board of Education because she claimed that her daughter was not receiving the rights granted in the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). Kathy Stuart was a student at Danbury High School in Connecticut with serious emotional, behavior, and academic difficulties. She was suppose to be in special education classes, but for some reason she hardly ever attended them. Kathy was involved in a school-wide disturbance. As a result of her complicity in these disturbances, she received a ten-day disciplinary suspension and was scheduled to appear at a disciplinary hearing. The Superintendent of Danbury Schools recommended to the Danbury Board of Education
Challenges to hate crime laws have been based on the First Amendment of the Constitution the right to free speech. The first major Supreme Court ruling on this issue was R. A. V. v. City...
Freedom of speech cannot be considered an absolute freedom, and even society and the legal system recognize the boundaries or general situations where the speech should not be protected. Along with rights comes civil responsib...