Daily Archives: December 9, 2014

are you recording me first amendment
my brother and i were recording all of the empty store by the mall and a lady saw us and tried to confront us. what dumbass.

By: harry zimbler

Visit link:
are you recording me first amendment - Video

Reappropriate: The Podcast, Ep #12 | Free speech vs. online threats
The Supreme Court is considering a case that might radically redefine what is considered a threat when made through digital media, with possible First Amendment ramifications. To talk about...

By: Jenn Reappropriate

Here is the original post:
Reappropriate: The Podcast, Ep #12 | Free speech vs. online threats - Video

People across the country are using their First Amendment freedoms to respond to the results of the grand juries in the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases. They are speaking out to draw attention to issues including race, police brutality and the workings of our justice system. Whats happening in your town?Are you covering local events and protests for your school newspaper or magazine?

If so, please email your story to DigitalClassroom@newseum.org! We will consider sharing it on our blog and for possible inclusion in our Digital Classroom Civil Rights Media Map. The deadline is Fri. Dec. 12 at 11:00 EST.

To learn more about the protests, and how they relate to the First Amendment, be sure to read the following Newseum-produced story and blog post. We will look for stories that also discuss how the First Amendment has played a role in the actions in your town.

Be sure to include your name, grade, name of newspaper, publication date, and the name and email address of your faculty advisor to the newspaper.

We want to have the chance to share your story so Newseum blog readers across the nation-and around the world-can learn more about how students are reporting on this volatile issue. We look forward to reading your story!

Read more here:
Calling All Student Journalists

December 8, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Nyland earns quick support across Seattle school system: In four months, interim Seattle superintendent Larry Nyland hasmanaged to earn support from many of the districts key players.The Seattle School Board will vote Wednesday on whether to extend his contact for two more years.

Seven biggest districts pledge to offer computer science (AP): The White House announced Monday that the seven largest school districts in the country are committing to make computer science a standard offering at high schools or middle schools. The College Board also announced a new course calledAP Computer Science Principles will debut in the fall of 2016.

First Amendment dispute over religious expression at Everett school (KUOW): A student at Cascade High School in Everett has filed a federal lawsuit against Everett Public Schools after he was suspended multiple times for passing out religious literature and preaching to other students. The student claims his First Amendment right to free speech was violated; the district said his actions were a significant disruption.

More headlines:

| More in News | Topics: round-up

The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only, and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times.

Read the original post:
Round-up: Nyland earns quick support, First Amendment dispute at Everett school

The case of a Pennsylvania teacher fired because of blog posts that criticized her own students has taken an interesting turn, as her lawyers claim viral Internet and television interest in the story protect her First Amendment rights.

The teacher, Philadelphias National Constitution Center is the first and only nonprofit, nonpartisan institution devoted to the most powerful vision of freedom ever expressed: the U.S. Constitution. Constitution Daily, the Centers blog, offers smart commentary and conversation about constitutional issues in the news, drawing insights from Americas history and a variety of expert contributors., caused a quite a stir back in 2011 and became a national media figure. Munroe lost her job at a suburban Philadelphia public high school after writing a series of blog posts that called her students jerks, rat like and whiny, among other things.

Monroes attorneys filed a civil suit against the Central Bucks school district in 2012, seeking $5 million in damages. In late July 2014, a federal district court judge in Philadelphia ruled against Munroe. But her attorneys have appealed.

Third District Judge Cynthia M. Rufe only decided one of two questions presented in the lawsuit. Rufe said Munroes statements werent protected by the First Amendment under a test established in two Supreme Court cases, so she didnt need to decide if the statements directly caused her termination.

In 1968 in a Supreme Court decision calledPickering v. Board of Educationand a later decision from 2006,Garcetti v. Ceballos, a balancing test was set by the Court about public employee statements and the First Amendment.

Commonly known as the Pickering test, a plaintiff such as Munroe must prove that her First Amendment interests as a public employee, and also as a citizen, in commenting on matters of public concern outweigh her public employers need to promote efficient public services.

Judge Rufe found that in this case, Munroes speech, in both effect and tone, was sufficiently disruptive so as to diminish any legitimate interest in its expression, and thus her [First Amendment] expression was not protected.

Rufe stated that, although Munroe may have occasionally written as a private citizen on matters of public concern, she chose to do so in an opprobrious tone that was likely to generate a strong reaction from anyone connected with the school who read it.

Originally posted here:
Do viral stories protect our 1st Amendment freedoms?

By Rachel Raczka

Boston.com Staff | 12.08.14 | 9:39 AM

ICYMI the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments last week about whether or not violent statements posted on social media are proof of intent to harm. And before you hit post on that status update about how Tommy So-and-So in your office is driving you so crazy you could strangle him, listen up.

The case at hand involves an Allentown, Penn., man named Anthony Elonis, who posted violent rants and threats against his estranged wife, schoolchildren, and law enforcement on Facebook in 2010. He was found guilty of making threats and the court sentenced him to 44 months in prison. Elonis appealed to the Supreme Court, where he argued that he didnt actually intend for his words to be threatening.

Words like this:

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

If I only knew then what I know now/I would have smothered your ass with a pillow/Dumped your body in the back seat/Dropped you off in Toad Creek and made it look like a rape and murder

Not pretty. But heres the catchElonis claims these were rap lyrics. Rather than a threat, theyre just an expression of creativity and therefore protected by the First Amendment, just as they are for musicians and rappers who have garnered praise and awards for lyrics like these for years. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. even quoted Eminems 97 Bonnie and Clyde during the debate.

The Supreme Court seems hung up on whether theres a difference in the creative liberties allowed to artists and those allowed to independent individuals. The intent of a statementwhether or not it is meant to incite fear and/or violencehas been paramount in previous cases brought before the justices and the lower courts. Also, in some cases, its more about who the threats are directed atthe military, the President of the United States, your family and peers. Sometimes a test known as the Dinwiddie factors, which gauges the frequency, medium, and reaction to a said threat, is used to determine whether or not its valid.

If the court decides that Eloniss intent was to show off his rap prowess and not to terrify two women and a bunch of children, it would set a problematic precedent, as Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. notes:

Read more from the original source:
The Supreme Court Is Tackling Facebook, Rap Lyrics, and the First Amendment