Make No Law: The Sullivan Case and the First Amendment by Anthony Lewis

Make No Law: The Sullivan Case and the First Amendment Anthony Lewis ebook
Publisher: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group
ISBN: 9780679739395
Format: pdf
Page: 356

Mar 10, 2014 - On March 9, 1964, a unanimous Supreme Court reversed a libel verdict against The New York Times in a case brought by Alabama officials who complained about a civil rights advertisement in the paper. This is a first amendment case to me. Jun 8, 2013 - Around this time Thursday, the Washington Post and the Guardian had made the case that major tech companies were involved in a PRISM program that, to quote the whistleblower who provided the information, allows the NSA to “quite literally can Aside from Fourth Amendment rights being tested, perhaps it's a good test for the First Amendment right of freedom of speech. Jun 6, 2008 - Like our case, Sullivan involved a political advertisement in the New York Times (about, in that instance, the opposition to the civil rights movement in the South, a movement of civil disobedience inspired by Mahatma Gandhi). Dec 19, 2013 - No one should be allowed to insert a clause that takes away a constitutional right to free speech. €Video Seems to Catch Professor in a Liberal Rant, but There's More to the Story,” The Chronicle, November 17. AS you can see that, although a huge load of these cases are regarding the clauses regarding religion and its practice, many cases involving the other clauses were also taken up and decided. May 1, 2012 - The first amendment of the United States Constitution adopted in 1787 provides that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. Jun 20, 2013 - Make No Law: The Sullivan Case and the First Amendment. Mar 1, 2014 - On March 9, 1964, a unanimous Supreme Court bucked precedent for libel and slander law and, in doing so, widened the scope of First Amendment protection for journalists. First Amendment Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of . Sullivan, decided unanimously by the Court on March 9, 1964, in a decision written by Justice William Brennan, finally gave national force to the lofty words of the First Amendment, that there should be “no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.