Category Archives: First Amendment

Imprinted in the minds of Indians are Jawaharlal Nehru's words delivered at the stroke of midnight on that most important day: when the soul of a na tion, long suppressed, finds utterance. Everyone longed for their beloved India to sprout wings and fly . I find myself wondering today , what is the point of it all, if the wings are used to fly in the wrong direction? Towards a direction that is not in tune with our innate culture? We made one such unfortunate turn early in our independent history .

Freedom-loving liberals among us must remember and hang our heads in shame at the regrettable turn we took on May 10, 1951. That was the day Jawaharlal Nehru piloted the First Amendment to the Indian Constitution (which was passed into law within a few weeks). Among other restrictions on our fundamental rights, this also restricted freedom of expression.

Many feel that this was in response to the Supreme Court judgment in 1950 on the `Romesh Thappar vs The State of Madras' case, through which the ban on Thappar's magazine (a Marxist journal called Crossroads) was lifted. Many lawyers opine that in effect, the Supreme Court had recognized unfettered freedom of expression as compliant with our original Constitution; just like it was in the US and far better than in Europe at the time. Legal luminaries also hold that since unfettered freedom of expression would have been recognized as a fundamental right, the illiberal IPC Section 295(a), a gift bequeathed by the British Raj, through which many books have been banned, would be overridden.

Why did the Nehru government pass the first amendment? Critics of Nehru will hold this as proof that he was not a classical liberal (defined as one who defends political and economic freedoms for all). Supporters of Nehru will say that he had to ensure unity of purpose in the first few years of independent India to stabilize our country; and some freedoms were a small price to pay for this. I'll let historians pass judgment on this issue.

I merely offer my take on the events that transpired; an observation that is based on my strong belief in freedom of expression. And this is not just as a liberal, but also as an inheritor of a culture that has a proud, millennia-long tradition of ideational freedom.

Freedom of expression is, frankly , the most Indian of values; one that was staunchly defended by Lord Brahma himself in the Natya Shastra. In ancient India one was free to create and encourage various versions of the holiest of epics like the Ramayan and Mahabharat; and all versions, some even unorthodox, were celebrated.In fact, one could even be an atheist in ancient India, as the Charvaks were (probably from the seventh century BC), and nobody would commit violence against them for being `ungodly'. One could practise out-of-the-ordinary rituals, as the Aghoras did (like ritual sex), and unlike in modern India, nobody would ban their practices as long as they didn't hurt another. Everyone had a right to find their own truth, in keeping with the spirit of the Rig Vedic maxim: Ekam Sat Vipraha Bahuda Vadanti. Truth is one, but the wise men speak it as many .

I would ask for only two restrictions to be placed on freedom of expression. On someone who exercises freedom of expression to suppress the freedom of expression of another; that is unacceptable. And on anyone who uses freedom of expression to directly call for violence. In every other case, absolute and unfettered freedom of expression should be practised.Every banned book should be unbanned. Every argument, no matter how troubling it may be, should be allowed expression. Sigmund Freud had said that the first human who hurled an insult instead of a stone was the founder of civilization.

All of us who count ourselves as liberals and are proud Indians must ask for the First Amendment to be repealed.Moreover, we must not practise the kind of hypocritical freedom of expression that the westerners practise, where views not in alignment with the prevailing orthodoxy are suppressed; not through violence, but by ensuring that one is prevented from visiting various public forums or one's works are not published (for example, the gagging of Ayaan Hirsi Ali). I must state that I disagree with many things Ms Ali says; but we must defend the right to speak even of those whose views are deeply troubling, provided that there is no direct call for violence.

Stopping the free flow of ideas is against India's innate culture. We are not in any sense being "westernized" if we ask for unfettered freedom of expression. In fact, we are being very Indian. Furthermore, as our ancestors realized thousands of years ago, freedom of expression is the foundation of a liberal and decent society .

As the Rig Veda says: `In speech is enshrined blessed glory , is enshrined Mother Lakshmi herself.'

Visit link:
Time to do away with Jawaharlal Nehru's first amendment to the Indian Constitution

Will Police Attack First Amendment Again in Ferguson?
Back in august there was a war on for journalist. A blatant attack on our first amendment. Have the police learned the constitution they are supposed to upho...

By: TheAlexJonesChannel

Here is the original post:
Will Police Attack First Amendment Again in Ferguson? - Video

HPD Chief Charles A. McClelland, Jr. on 97.9 the Box
HPD Chief McClelland went live on 97.9 the Box on 11/19 to discuss the situation in Ferguson, MO. HPD respects and encourages those who wish to exercise their First Amendment Rights and will...

By: Houston Police

See the original post here:
HPD Chief Charles A. McClelland, Jr. on 97.9 the Box - Video

First Amendment Allows Google to Organize Its Search Results
Thanks to Intel (and my patrons) for helping make this video possible. Patrons get tons of daily bonuses, and everybody gets to participate in the Intel Android tablet giveaways! Become a...

By: LockerGnome #39;s Geek Lifestyles

View post:
First Amendment Allows Google to Organize Its Search Results - Video

First Amendment, Smantha Jones our hero
God give us our rights not man, not government, not kings. Once you take God out of the picture you have no natural rights.

By: VMDweb.com

View original post here:
First Amendment, Smantha Jones our hero - Video

Book Review | The First Amendment
BOOK REVIEW OF YOUR FAVORITE BOOK =--- Where to buy this book? ISBN: 9781599417516 Book Review of The First Amendment by Henry J Fletcher Professor of Law and Associate De ...

By: Book Reviews

Continued here:
Book Review | The First Amendment - Video

MORE THAN 25 percent of teens and adolescents have been bullied reportedly through the Internet or their cell phones. These statistics were obtained by the i-SAFE foundation. More than a quarter of Americas teens report being harassed and humiliated through electronic media. It is up to the schools to ensure that the learning environment remains undisturbed, up to fellow students to report cyberbullying they may witness, and up to the courts to uphold the First Amendment without allowing these students to be harmed.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states that Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech. However, our First Amendment right does not need to be limited to limit the impact of social comments conveyed through social media. In 1969, the Supreme Court case of Tinker v. Des Moines centered on students protesting the Vietnam war by wearing black arm bands to school. The school insisted the students remove the bands, and the students argued that this limited their right to free speech.

The court ruled in favor of the students, stating that this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students. Although the school did not win in this case, it set the precedent that schools can combat bullying that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students, disrupting students education.

However, while a school has the right to punish a cyberbully for disrupting education, it does not have the right to invade students online accounts without cause, as this does violate a bullys First Amendment right. Therefore, it is the duty of the target and the fellow students to stand up and report cyberbullying so the school may then determine whether a students education is being disrupted and, if so, decide consequences for the bully. The saying sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me is less accurate today. Between texting and social media, the words written electronically are forever. A hurtful comment to a peer is no longer just a passing insult in the hallway.The psychological and emotional torture of cyberbullying is real and devastating.

According to ABC News, 160,000 kids stay home from school each day to avoid bullying. About 4,000 young people commit suicide each year, with bully victims being two to nine times more likely to consider suicide, according to Yale University.

While the First Amendment must be protected, so must the lives and the education of students. When students opportunity to learn is ripped from them as a result of cyberbullying, schools have a right and a duty to intervene on behalf of the victim.

As Andrew Johnson once said, honest conviction is my courage; the Constitution is my guide. With the Constitution as a guide, schools must honestly convict those perverting the First Amendment to infringe upon any students right to education.

.

Kayla Bullwinkel is a senior at Millford High School. With this essay, she won this years New Hampshire Constitution Day essay contest, sponsored by the New Hampshire Supreme Court, the Nackey Loeb School of Communications, and several New Hampshire newspapers,

See more here:
Kayla Bullwinkel Schools must go after cyber bullies while respecting the First Amendment

Attorney General Eric Holder announced Friday that the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services will provide law enforcement officers with a new guide that will compile information, tools, and best practices to maintain public safety while safeguarding constitutional rights during First Amendment-protected events.

TheJustice Department encourages law enforcement officers in every jurisdiction to work with the communities that they serve to minimize needless confrontation, Holder said.

The announcement was made in a video released Friday morning. Holder didnt mention Ferguson by name in the video, but a grand jury decision on whether to indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown is expected to come within the next few days.

The grand jury is examining whether the Aug. 9 shooting was justified. Potential charges against Wilson could range from first-degree murder to involuntary manslaughter, though many protesters in the St. Louis suburb are anticipating that Wilson will not be indicted.

Over the past few months, weve seen demonstrations and protests that have sought to bring attention to real and significant underlying issues involving police practices, implicit bias and pervasive community distrust, Holder said in the video. In most cases, these demonstrations have been both meaningful and responsible and have brought vital issues to the attention of the public at large.

Similarly, I want toemphasize this, the vast majority of law enforcement officers have honorably defended their fellow citizens engaged in these peaceful protests.

Holder said that peaceful protests have the potential to spark a sustained and positive national dialogue, but cautioned that as weve seen, durable relationships between the police and their communities do not develop overnight.

He also addressed First Amendment demonstrators in his message, saying that the most successful and enduring movements for change are those that adhere to nonaggression and nonviolence. He encouraged demonstrators to act in a way that respects the gravity of their subject matter.

In a new video released Friday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced "a new guide" to help law enforcement officers "maintain public safety while safeguarding constitutional rights during First Amendment-protected events." (Department of Justice)

[This post has been updated.]

Read the original here:
Holder announces new guidance to law enforcement officers ahead of Ferguson decision

Park service tells me no 1st amendment at parks
Well this park employee on the rail trail told me I can #39;t have any "political " signs on my bike. Well I am exercising my first amendment rights , free speech,freedom of the press, right to...

By: That guy for 2a defend the constitution

Follow this link:
Park service tells me no 1st amendment at parks - Video

Yesterday the City Council Consumer Affairs Committee heard testimony relating to a bill that would require costumed characters across New York City to register with the Department of Consumer Affairs in order to accept tips or donations. "This straight up seems like fascism to me," Keith Albahaye, a.k.a. The New York Joker, told the councilmembers. "The First Amendment is the First Amendment. I'm not gonna be allowed on 52nd Street and Broadway in the United States of America?"

At the outset of the hearing, the bill's sponsor, Bronx Councilmember Andy King, testified that "the bill is not designed to take away anyone's First Amendment rights," and he added that his aim wasn't to raise questions about a performer's immigration status either. King said that his own five-year-old daughter was traumatized by an encounter with a character this past summer.

"Strawberry Shortcake didn't get the proper tip she wanted, she ripped off her own head and started to berate her father and her family," King said. "In the mind of a five year old, how do you comprehend a head being snatched off? In cartoons you can erase the head and you can draw it back on, but in human life you can't do that. We want to make sure we can maintain that kind of innocence for our children and our families."

Midtown South Commander Edward Winski testified that since 2009, the police have arrested 38 costumed performers in Times Square, 18 of those occurring this year. Most were for aggressive solicitation, but others were more serious, such as when a Spiderman struck a police officer and when Woody from Toy Story was arrested for sexually assaulted a woman by grabbing her buttock.

Councilmember Dan Garodnick, whose district covers a portion of Times Square, noted that King's bill merely reiterates the law prohibiting aggressive solicitation, the enforcement of which is currently up to the NYPD.

"Even under the bill as proposed, those same subtle questions exist," Garodnick said. "I think it still leaves open a lot of those questions which ultimately, if the police are not there to enforce, we're just where we are today."

Int. 467 would make it illegal "for any costumed individual while wearing a costume to solicit in return for posing for photographs or otherwise interacting with the public in public places without having first obtained a license."

Steven Shiffrin, professor emeritus at Cornell Law School and the author of numerous books on the First Amendment, told us in September that a law like this may not pass constitutional muster.

"Wearing costumes is a form of First Amendment expression, and the First Amendment does not permit government to charge its citizens as a pre-condition of exercising their rights," Shiffrin wrote in an email. "This principle takes on special force when the charge is exorbitant and when the purported justification for its imposition is so obviously a pretext."

A representative from the Department of Consumer Affairs also revealed that in addition to the $175 fee for the two-year license, characters would have to pay a $75 fingerprinting fee. There are 14 other licensed professions that require fingerprinting, including auctioneers, auto repair workers, bingo hosts, process servers, pawn brokers, and tow truck drivers. The representative noted that the costume license would be the cheapest, though a general vendor license costs $200. A tow truck company pays $600 per truck.

Continued here:
Times Square Joker Says Costume Law Is "Straight Up Fascism"