WEEK 3 (06/13 to 06/16): First and Second Amendments

Welcome to Week 3!

Overview

This week, we will be focusing on the first two constitutional amendments.

The First Amendment prohibits Congress from making any laws that abridge or restrict freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or the right to assemble peaceably and to request the government respond to complaints of its citizens. However, no rights are absolute, so the government can regulate them when social interests outweigh that of the individual. Religious freedom includes the freedom to worship, to print instructional material, to train teachers and to organize schools in which to teach, and to be free of government control or interference. The establishment clause of the First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” That is, Congress cannot create a national church or prescribed religion. The free exercise clause of the First Amendment declares that “Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting the free exercise [of religion].”  Freedom of speech/expression includes the right to speak and the right to be heard. Congress has passed laws to limit speech that advocates overthrowing the government by force. The “clear and present danger” test was replaced by the “imminent lawless action” test to determine when speech should not be protected by the First Amendment. As public employees, law enforcement officers’ speech is protected under the First Amendment only if it is 1) a matter of public concern or 2) unrelated to employment. Symbolic acts are included within the protection of the First Amendment, such as flag burning. Freedom of the press applies to all types of printed and broadcast material, including books, newspapers, magazines, pamphlets, films and radio and television programs.

The Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms in the context of a well-regulated militia. It is subject of much controversy as civilian gun ownership increases. Historically, the militia was considered to be the entire adult male populace of a state. They were not simply allowed to keep arms, but were at times required to do so by law. A central controversy over the Second Amendment is whether people have a right to bear arms as individuals rather than only as part of a militia. The number of militia groups in the United States increased dramatically from 2008 to 2009. The two opposing interpretations of the Second Amendment involve whether the amendment guarantees individuals’ rights to keep and bear arms or whether it guarantees the states freedom from federal government infringement on this right. Judicial decisions over time reveal changes in how the Court has viewed Second Amendment guarantees. In United States v. Miller (1939) the court recognized a state right rather than an individual right to bear arms. In 1971 the courts ruled that there was no express right of an individual to keep and bear arms (Stevens v. United States). Both decisions have since been reversed. In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court stated in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia. In McDonald v. Chicago (2010) the Supreme Court, holding that the right to keep and bear arms was among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty, ruled that the Second Amendment does apply to the states and incorporated it under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Learning Objectives

  • List the basic freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment.
  • Identify the freedoms included in religious freedom.
  • Understand what freedom of speech guarantees to U.S. citizens.
  • Grasp what is included in freedom of the press.
  • Identify who was, historically, included in the militia and what was required of them.
  • Summarize the opposing interpretations of the Second Amendment that have clashed over the years.
  • Explain the significance of the District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).
  • Understand the significance of McDonald v. Chicago (2010).

Workflow

Readings:

1. The U. S. Constitution and Constitutional Lawedited by Brian Duignan, Rosen Publishing Group, 2012. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bmcc/detail.action?docID=934413. You can download the chapter here.

The_U._S._Constitution_and_Constitutional_Law_-_Pg_32-50

2. First Amendment Timelinehttps://www.annenbergclassroom.org/resource/first-amendment/

3. Second Amendmenthttps://www.annenbergclassroom.org/resource/our-constitution/constitution-amendment-2/

Videos

 

Power Point Files