196k views
1 vote
explain the extent of which supreme court interpretations of the first and second amendments reflect a commitment to individal liberty

User JillAndMe
by
5.7k points

1 Answer

4 votes

Answer:

The First Amendment contains our most cherished rights. Often our courts give them a preferred position. Governments did not give these rights to us. Rather we empower governments to protect these natural rights. The fundamental rights contained in the First Amendment are: freedom of speech; freedom of press; freedom of religion, freedom of assembly; and freedom of petition. Majority rule cannot interfere with these rights, nor can government abridge these rights. The federal judiciary often is called upon to serve as the guardian of these rights. Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals. The freedom of speech gets preferential treatment by the courts. It is our most sacred right. Yet even freedom of speech has its limits. You are not free to publish obscene materials. You are not free to lie or slander others nor can you write falsely which is called libel. There are numerous court precedents that define when and where our free speech can and cannot be limited. Schenck v. U.S. (1919) was an early example of a limit on our free speech. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously stated in his opinion, “…Free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater.” The ruling precedent of this case established the clear and present danger standard. Dangerous speech can be limited

User LeonS
by
5.3k points