Werewolf Therapeutics – On March 16, Entered Into A First … – Kalkine Media

The Bill of Rights consists of the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, including the First Amendment. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution in order to appease Anti-Federalists who thought the new Constitution did not provide adequate safeguards for rights of the people. (Image via Wikimedia Commons, public domain)

The Bill of Rights consists of the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

In response to the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation, which guided the fledging nation from 1781 to 1798, the countrys leaders convened a convention in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 to amend the Articles, but delegates to the Convention thought such a step would be inadequate and took the more radical one of proposing a new document. From the Virginia and New Jersey Plans, a Great (Connecticut) Compromise was reached that resolved some of the factional disputes between the large and small states. The Convention also adopted scores of other compromises in forming each of the three branches of the national government and the relationship between this government and the states.

When the Convention reported the Constitution to the states for ratification, the nation split between Federalist supporters of the new document and Anti-Federalist opponents, who were especially concerned that it did not, like most state counterparts, have a bill of rights (of the 11 state constitutions in place in the years after independence, 7 had bills of rights). To ensure ratification of the document, the Federalists offered concessions, and the First Congress proposed a Bill of Rights as protection for those fearful of a strong national government. The Bill of Rights came into effect in December 1791, after ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

The level of support for the new Constitution varied. During the debate over its ratification, the Federalists grounded their support for the document in the shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation. In late October 1787, the first in a series of 85 essays appeared in printbearing the pen name Publius. These essays, which became known as the Federalist Papers, were written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. They presented a succinct series of arguments that, even today, are revered in the annals of political theory. The essays addressed the manner in which the new republican government, based on federalism and separation of powers, would guard against the tyranny of interest groups and other threats.

However, the Anti-Federalists were not convinced that these safeguards were adequate. Led by George Mason, Patrick Henry, and Elbridge Gerry, the Anti-Federalists wrote their own essays, basing their arguments on the tyranny of the British monarchy so resented by the 13 original colonies. This faction sought additional protections that would guard against an overly centralized and oppressive national government.

Ratification of the U.S. Constitution was a slow and arduous process. Although the approval of only nine states was needed to ensure the documents ratification (Article VII), ultimately the support of all 13 states was secured. Thus from the ashes of the Articles of Confederation emerged a federal system with enduring features such as republicanism, separated institutional powers, and a system of checks and balances. The Constitution set forth the institutional structures, players, processes, and procedures for governing the new nation through a series of seven articles.

Despite the seemingly apparent victory achieved in ratifying the Constitution, the founders failed to resolve the continuing debate over limiting the powers of the national government. As Alexander Hamilton remarked in Federalist No. 84, the most considerable of the remaining objections is, that the plan of the convention contains no bill of rights. To ease the process toward ratification, supporters such as Revolutionary War hero George Washington had suggested creating a series of guarantees that would ultimately prevent the national government from tampering with certain rights and liberties deemed essential to a democratic form of government.

James Madison, who appears to have been influenced on the subject by Thomas Jefferson, took the lead in the First Congress in composing the Bill of Rights. Although the list of rights and liberties suggested by the former colonies was extensive, Madison narrowed it to 12 amendments, known as the Bill of Rights. Ten of these amendments became part of the U.S. Constitution in 1791 after securing the approval of the required three-fourths of the states.

The Bill of Rights resolved one of the most glaring deficiencies of the new Constitution preventing thegovernments abuse of individual liberties.

The First Amendment, one of the more symbolic and litigious of the amendments, guarantees fundamental rights such as freedom of religion, speech, and the press, and the rights to assemble peacefully and to petition the government. The free exercise clause in the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting religious beliefs and practices, although exceptions have been made in situations in which ceremonial practices threaten an individuals safety or welfare. The establishment clause of the First Amendment has been interpreted as calling for separation of church and state.

This separation has been observed through various legal precedents and U.S. Supreme Court interpretations of the wall of separation doctrine, which states that government laws may not have as their purpose an intent to aid religion. This doctrine has been further reinforced through a three-part Lemon test, named for the 1971 Supreme Court decision Lemon v. Kurtzman. The Lemon test requires that laws have a secular purpose, that their primary effect neither advances nor inhibits religion, and that they do not foster excessive government entanglement with religion.

The First Amendment also addresses freedom of expression. The free expression clause guarantees the rights of individuals and the press to speak freely about issues, even those deemed controversial. Freedom of speech has generated substantial debate and legal controversy. However, the clear and present danger test developed by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. in the 1919 Supreme Court decision Schenck v. United States provides the means for deciding whether a particular speech is protected by the First Amendment.

Under this test, the Court has upheld speech that advocates ideas or arguments, but has declared speech that incites violence or creates a clear and present danger to society to be unconstitutional. Nor are fighting words protected by the First Amendment, because they inflict injury or incite violence. The press is also protected by the doctrine of no prior restraint, which has developed out of the First Amendment. Under this doctrine, government restrictions and the licensing of media content prior to publication are unconstitutional.

Interpretations of the right to assemble have been further applied to include the right of association in organizations. Although the right to assemble includes peaceful protests, parades, and demonstrations, it does not extend to the right to prevent access to public buildings.

The Second Amendment provides for the maintenance of state militias, and it guarantees the right of citizens to bear arms. This amendment was considered important becausein the Revolutionary War citizens had to protect themselves from tyranny and threats to their safety and that of the nation.

The Third Amendment also has its roots in the Revolutionary War era. It protects personal privacy by preventing the quartering of soldiers in a private home without the owners consent in peacetime, or according to the prescribed law in times of war.

The Fourth Amendment prevents unreasonable searches and seizures, and requires authorities to show probable cause to obtain warrants to search and seize dwellings and property.

The Fifth Amendment also deals with personal rights and certain guarantees against the unconstitutional treatment of accused persons. It requires a grand jury indictment for serious crimes, prohibits repeated prosecution for the same offense (double jeopardy), and prevents the government from taking life, liberty, or property without due process of the law. The well-known saying taking the Fifth is derived from the provision that no persons shall be compelled in any criminal case to testify against themselves that is, submit to self-incrimination. This amendment also addresses the concept of eminent domain that is, the owner of private property seized for public use must receive just compensation for that property.

The Sixth Amendment sets forth additional guarantees for accused persons: the right to be informed of an accusation, the right to have a speedy and public trial, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to legal counsel for defense.

The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a jury in civil cases in which the value in controversy exceeds $20.

Also related to trials, the Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bails and fines and cruel and unusual punishment for those found guilty of a crime.

The Ninth Amendment protects rights not specified in the Constitution, and the Tenth Amendment reserves for the states or citizens all other powers not delegated to the national government or denied to the states.

Despite their ratification as formal amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the amendments of the Bill of Rights were initially applied only to the powers of the federal government and not those of the states. This limited application was reaffirmed in the 1833 Supreme Court decision Barron v. Baltimore. That situation changed, however, after ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment on July 9, 1868, after the Civil War. It declared that no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, and provided the basis for the argument that the rights in the first 10 amendments now applied to the states.

But even then,only selective incorporation, or the application of certain but not all portions of the Bill of Rights, occurred until a series of Court decisions among them, Gitlow v. New York (1925), incorporating freedom of speech, and Palko v. Connecticut (1937), which failed to incorporate the Fifth Amendment provision against double jeopardy because the Court did not, at that time, consider that right to be fundamental.

A recent book by Gerard N. Magliocca has demonstrated that, in part because the first 10 amendments did not follow the traditional form of previous bills or declarations of rights, it was not common to characterize the first 10 amendments as the bill of rights until after the Spanish-American War in 1898. At that time, American leaders promised that these rights (or at least some of them) would protect residents in the new foreign colonies that the nation had acquired.

Just as Federalists had used the bill of rights to assure state ratification of the Constitution in an earlier era, so too, modern American leaders subsequently used the protections to allay fears about increasing federal powers, such as those that Congress assumed during the New Deal, and to contrast American values with those of the totalitarian powers against which the nation was arrayed in World War II and the Cold War.

This list of guarantees has provided protections against the arbitrary and tyrannical treatment of citizens by their government, and has been understood to include a right to privacy.Many decisions by the Supreme Court have reinforced the protection of these liberties and further extended the application of the first Amendment and other provisions within the Bill of Rights to state and local governments.

This article was originally published in 2009 and updated in 2018. Daniel Baracskay teaches in the public administration program at Valdosta State University.

Originally posted here:

Bill of Rights | The First Amendment Encyclopedia

10 Facts About the First Amendment and Elections

Posted on January 22, 2023 by admin

The rights protected by the First Amendment are crucial to the democratic process. Here are ten things we think you should know about the First Amendment and elections!

Fact 1: The First Amendment protects the actions that allow debate, discussion, conversation, political action, protest, and more. It ensures our most fundamental rights that allow us to think for ourselves and share our opinions. The First Amendment enables us to participate in our democracy, and the most essential way everyone can do that is by voting!

Fact 2: The right to vote is NOT listed in the First Amendment.In fact, its nowhere to be found in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Prior to the Civil War peoples eligibility to vote was largely left up to the individual states to determine. After the war, language concerning the right to vote became quite popular and is found in the 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments. Through the amendment process, the right to vote has expanded exponentially, bringing the vote to more and more people.

Fact 3: Academics and lawyers still debate whether voting is a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment. Some people argue that it is a privilege or a responsibility, rather than a right. The issue remains largely unresolved with a lot of grey areas.

Fact 4: A candidate must meet a variety of requirements and deadlines before their name appears on a ballot. These ballot access laws are determined locally, resulting in eligibility requirements that vary widely across the United States. Many people think ballot access restrictions infringe on candidates First Amendment rights and are a way for the government to stifle the democratic process. Recently, Kanye West was denied ballot access in many states and has subsequently sued five states for not including him.

Photo: Robyn Beck / AFP / Getty Images

Fact 5: In Citizens United vs. Federal Election the Supreme Court decided that unlimited political spending is a form of free speech thats protected under the First Amendment. This case has opened the door for corporations and unions to spend as much money as they want to support their chosen political candidates.

Fact 6: The boundaries of voting districts are redrawn from time to time as communities grow or shrink in order to keep legislative representation in fair proportions. But sometimes, voting districts are gerrymandered, or redrawn to manipulate election outcomes, which many people feel is an infringement on free speech. Academically, the Supreme Court has found gerrymandering incompatible with democratic principles, but has taken no action to prevent it, claiming the various issues behind gerrymandering are beyond the reach of the Court.

Fact 7: Numerous on-going investigations of purported voter intimidation have happened during this election. Many of these perceived instances are described by defendants as free speech and free expression, however. For example, one case involves an off-duty police officer in Miami who was photographed in full uniform at a polling place wearing a mask that read Trump 2020 and No more bullst. Does this constitute voter intimidation, or is it free speech?

Photo: Steve Simeonidis via Twitter

Fact 8: Some states and communities have enacted campaign buffer-zones around polling places. These buffers keep campaign signs and supporters some distance away from polling sites. Courts have upheld the legality of these buffer-zones but critics claim they are an unjust restriction on freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.

Photo: WLOS.com

Fact 9: Recently, social media sites have been accused by all sides of the political spectrum for blocking campaign ads, censoring free speech, and endorsing candidates. But the First Amendment does not have to be applied equally across social media platforms. Because such sites are owned by private companies, they are not public forums, and the sites themselves are free to censor the content they choose to allow.

Fact 10: HOWEVER, in a recent ruling, a district court found that because President Trump uses his private Twitter account for official business, his Twitter feed does constitute a designated public forum. The suit was brought against Trump because he blocked the plaintiffs on Twitter, which the court ruled was an infringement of free speech. President Trump appealed the decision to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. If the original ruling stands it could open up more government regulation over private social media companies and affect future elections.

See the article here:

10 Facts About the First Amendment and Elections

Freedom of Speech – Origins, First Amendment & Limits – HISTORY

Posted on January 22, 2023 by admin

Contents

Freedom of speechthe right to express opinions without government restraintis a democratic ideal that dates back to ancient Greece. In the United States, the First Amendment guarantees free speech, though the United States, like all modern democracies, places limits on this freedom. In a series of landmark cases, the U.S. Supreme Court over the years has helped to define what types of speech areand arentprotected under U.S. law.

The ancient Greeks pioneered free speech as a democratic principle. The ancient Greek word parrhesia means free speech, or to speak candidly. The term first appeared in Greek literature around the end of the fifth century B.C.

During the classical period, parrhesia became a fundamental part of the democracy of Athens. Leaders, philosophers, playwrights and everyday Athenians were free to openly discuss politics and religion and to criticize the government in some settings.

In the United States, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech.

The First Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791 as part of the Bill of Rightsthe first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights provides constitutional protection for certain individual liberties, including freedoms of speech, assembly and worship.

The First Amendment doesnt specify what exactly is meant by freedom of speech. Defining what types of speech should and shouldnt be protected by law has fallen largely to the courts.

In general, the First Amendment guarantees the right to express ideas and information. On a basic level, it means that people can express an opinion (even an unpopular or unsavory one) without fear of government censorship.

It protects all forms of communication, from speeches to art and other media.

While freedom of speech pertains mostly to the spoken or written word, it also protects some forms of symbolic speech. Symbolic speech is an action that expresses an idea.

Flag burning is an example of symbolic speech that is protected under the First Amendment. Gregory Lee Johnson, a youth communist, burned a flag during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas to protest the Reagan administration.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in 1990, reversed a Texas courts conviction that Johnson broke the law by desecrating the flag. Texas v. Johnson invalidated statutes in Texas and 47 other states prohibiting flag burning.

Scroll to Continue

Not all speech is protected under the First Amendment.

Forms of speech that arent protected include:

Speech inciting illegal actions or soliciting others to commit crimes arent protected under the First Amendment, either.

The Supreme Court decided a series of cases in 1919 that helped to define the limitations of free speech. Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917, shortly after the United States entered into World War I. The law prohibited interference in military operations or recruitment.

Socialist Party activist Charles Schenck was arrested under the Espionage Act after he distributed fliers urging young men to dodge the draft. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction by creating the clear and present danger standard, explaining when the government is allowed to limit free speech. In this case, they viewed draft resistant as dangerous to national security.

American labor leader and Socialist Party activist Eugene Debs also was arrested under the Espionage Act after giving a speech in 1918 encouraging others not to join the military. Debs argued that he was exercising his right to free speech and that the Espionage Act of 1917 was unconstitutional. In Debs v. United States the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Espionage Act.

The Supreme Court has interpreted artistic freedom broadly as a form of free speech.

In most cases, freedom of expression may be restricted only if it will cause direct and imminent harm. Shouting fire! in a crowded theater and causing a stampede would be an example of direct and imminent harm.

In deciding cases involving artistic freedom of expression the Supreme Court leans on a principle called content neutrality. Content neutrality means the government cant censor or restrict expression just because some segment of the population finds the content offensive.

In 1965, students at a public high school in Des Moines, Iowa, organized a silent protest against the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to protest the fighting. The students were suspended from school. The principal argued that the armbands were a distraction and could possibly lead to danger for the students.

The Supreme Court didnt bitethey ruled in favor of the students right to wear the armbands as a form of free speech in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District. The case set the standard for free speech in schools. However, First Amendment rights typically dont apply in private schools.

What does free speech mean?; United States Courts.Tinker v. Des Moines; United States Courts.Freedom of expression in the arts and entertainment; ACLU.

See original here:

Freedom of Speech - Origins, First Amendment & Limits - HISTORY