From the 18th to century to now, freedom of the press as been a topic of contention in the courts. Whether it is cases about alleged libel against a public figure or the government attempting to censor the media for publishing criticism or scandalous news about the government, the Supreme Court has played its part in constructing the precedent for freedom of speech cases today. Cases such as New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and New York Times Co. v. United States enforced publications rights to be the voice for the people and responsibilities to make sure that the people’s voices will be heard.
When in 1735 that John Zenger was put on trial for “seditious libel,” for publishing inflammatory words against the royal governor of the New York Colony, there was not a First Amendment to protect him. The only people who were protected with freedom of speech were the members of Parliament as dictated in the Bill of Rights 1689. That changed when the jury ruled him not guilty because what he was saying was true. Libel would once again be re-defined 200 years later with New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.
On March 29, 1960, The New York Times published the paper with an ad bought by the “Committee to Defend Martin Luther King and the Struggle for Freedom in the
The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government 's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and
John Peter Zenger committed libel in a newspaper, stating blunt truths about the government’s faults. William Cosby didn’t like this at all, so he had him tried. The verdict was made quickly: not guilty. The case became vital to the lives of the American colonies by giving them the First Amendment: Freedom of the Press. It had a large impact on the lives of the citizens by allowing them to say whatever they wanted about the government in a newspaper or other form of public writing. John Peter Zenger is now known today for giving us this freedom.
In the Supreme Court case of the New York Times Co. vs. United States there is a power struggle. This struggle includes the entities of the individual freedoms against the interests of federal government. It is well known that the first amendment protects the freedom of speech, but to what extent does this freedom exist. There have been instances in which speech has been limited; Schenck vs. United States(1919) was the landmark case which instituted such limitations due to circumstances of “clear and present danger”. Many have noted that the press serves as an overseer which both apprehends and guides national agenda. However, if the federal government possessed the ability to censor the press would the government restrain itself? In the case of the Pentagon Papers the necessities of individual freedoms supersedes the scope of the national government.
I did not know that the Federal Government suppressed dissent to the level that it
“When a country does experience major conflict, such as civil wars or major regime-challenging protests, press freedoms are more closely associated with nonviolent conflict compared to violent conflict” (Why Freedom of Speech Matters). Freedom of expression gives people the chance to speak out toward their government, and express their issues. This makes it simpler for the government to respond to them, decreasing the risk of violence. “I found that when comparing instances of major nonviolent conflict (think Tunisia protests during Arab Spring) and violent conflict (think Syrian civil war), higher levels of press freedoms were strong predictors of nonviolent conflict over violent conflict” (Why Freedom of Speech Matters). With this in mind, there could be more violence toward the government or between the people of the United states, if freedom of expression did not exist.
John Peter Zenger was the one who established the idea of freedom of speech and the press. The Constitution of the United States reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Zenger. Zenger was arrested for libel, which is something that goes against the government. Although he did not write the article, he was the one accused because he printed and published it.
One key to the first amendment of the United states constitution is the right to free speech. Freedom of speech is what separates America than other countries around the world that forbid freedom of speech rights. Freedom of speech has been in our constitution since the year 1791. When James Madison “the father of the constitution” wrote the bill of rights he saw potential and that it would make the country more freedom filled than other countries. The land of the free is what the United States is nicknamed and it 's because of our rights to express ourselves as freely as we desire.
In the past, the U.S. Congress has passed acts in a time of crisis for the safety of our nation. With this information being acknowledged many ask, "If the government had previous powers to do so?" One act that was passed was the Sedition Act of 1798. This law was passed due to a threat of war with the French. This act basically stated that no person should conspire or scheme any plans against the government. This includes conspiracy by mouth, actions, or any other way possible. Even though the Bill of Rights state that the people have the right to freely express themselves through speech, the government revised or revoked that amendment during that particular time. This act became null and void on March 3, 1801 which was stated in Section 4 of the Sedition Act. Another act that was passed through Congress was the Espionage Act of 1918 during World War I. This act says that no one should slander the name of the U.S. government nor the naval forces and the military. It also states that no one should speak, print, or publish anything disloyal or scurrilous concerning the U.S. as a whole during the time of war. These rules are located in Section 3 of the Espionage Act. This goes against the 1st Amendment which allows the freedom of expression through speech and press, but as you can the government still passed the act. The act wasn't repealed until the year of 1921. Two more important cases where the government exemplified their power is in the Supreme Court: Hirabayashi v.
After the Revolutionary War in America, many states recommend that free speech be put in the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, freedom of speech was written into the Bill of Rights and was ratified in 1791. A few years after the First Amendment was ratified, the government passed the Sedition Act of 1798. This was to help prevent resistance or rebellion against the government. It also made it illegal to print, write or say “any false, scandalous and malicious” things against the government.
Herbeck, Tedford (2007). Boston College: Freedom of Speech in the United States (fifth edition) Zacchini vs. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Company 433 U.S. 562 Retrieved on March 2, 2008 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/zacchini.html
Returning power to the states meant relinquishing powers of the central government, and this began with repealing the Alien and Sedition Acts. One of Adam’s major flaws in his presidency was the execution of the Alien and Sedition Acts which allowed the government to compulsorily banish foreigners and jail newspaper editors for scandalous
According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).
The Free Speech Movement protested the ban of on campus political activities and speeches. Thousands of students became involved in this protest and together they displayed how much power there was in student activism. In the fall of 1964, the Regents of the university enforced a new ban that blocked students from holding political activities at Sproul Plaza on Bancroft and Telegraph. This was unsettling to them because the Bancroft Strip was a key location that students occupied when trying to reach out, raise funds and speak up for what they believed in. Previous policies suggested that student life outside of the university wouldn't be tampered or interfered with, so this was an outrage to the students of UC Berkeley. When the regents took time to revise and tweak the ban, students were still unhappy with the decision, so a sit in at Sproul Hall was organized and it lasted for nearly 10 hours.
The First Amendment was made to counteract censorship. Though, it is often believed that it was actually made to allow States to punish rather than to guarantee freedom of expression. To counteract this, the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed in 1798. These acts made it illegal to print “False, Scandalous and Malicious writing (“Censorship, Press and Artistic”). “
The old proverb “the Pen is mightier than the sword” (Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Richelieu; Or the Conspiracy) still holds significance in protecting of public rights. Words such as freedom, and liberty engendered the idea for democracy. Such words formed into sentences and paragraphs enlightened the public to take action against tyranny and corruption. Freedom of the press is what ensured the general masses of their public rights. The exemplary case in which the freedom of the press played a role was the endeavors of Woodward and Bernstein to unravel the corrupted politics behind the Watergate Scandal. The movie All the President’s Men depicts the proceedings of the Watergate scandal, the scheme to attack the crux of democracy: “ the open election”. Also how the two journalists of the Washington Post progressed to unveil the relationship between the Watergate Burglary and the White House. On one hand, the movie represents the role of the media in its obligation to convey the truth to the masses. On the other hand, the movie reflects political corruption and conspiracy. The accomplishment of Woodward and Bernstein presents the importance of the interaction between the media, the government, and the general masses of society. The role of the media is not only to intervene between the State and the public, but also to take account of public ideas and to apply those ideas to new policies. Also, the media acts as a safeguard to prevent the corruption of the State. Thus, the Watergate scandal signifies the significance of the media as an intermediary between the government and the public mass.
The Bill of Rights has gained existence since December 15, 1791. Being supported mainly by anti-federalists, the Bill of Rights upheld what was needed to protect individual liberty. From the ratification we have our first ten amendments. The most important and used today is the first amendment. The amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting… petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This amendment is very powerful but cannot be overly abused. Over time the freedom of speech has been constricted. There are many court cases that display the limitation of free speech. Environmental factors and certain materials are not covered in free speech. To understand our rights and know how and when our rights are limited, we must