Bloggin big willy style |
|
William D. Randall's Blog (of no particular interest to no one in particular)
Yep that's right there is no e-mail address on this page (I h8 !@#$#% Spam !@#$@). Vistors: thanks for visiting! Friends: Drop me a line through the usual channels, Thanks.
"We Have Just Begun to Fight...." Winston Churchill "Audentes Fortuna Juvat" - "Fortune Favors the Bold"
Archives
The Bookshelf
|
Monday, April 09, 2007
FINALS BLOGGING SERIES: CON LAW II OK , "we're back in the tree again." It is the wonderful time of the year when caffeinated beverages are a must and sanity is for those who don't know any better.Today's subject is....First Amendment: Content Based v. Content Neutral Regulations. The "abbreviated" prompt is included below. Please note: The following is provided for (1) my personal purposes to get the pre-exam writing jitters out of the way, (2) not intended to provide legal advice in any way, shape, or form, and (3) not for any further publication, copying, borrowing, referencing, etc.. without contacting the author, and (4) may have errors. It shouldn't, but last I checked, I'm human and mistakes do happen. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discuss the constitutionality of this ordinance under a content-neutral/content-based approach. Do not discuss the "public forum" issue. NOTE: 500 Word Limit. Is the The Under the First Amendment, as applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment, the government is prohibited from distinguishing speech based on the ideology of the message being expressed by the speaker. Laws that prohibit types of speech, or impose differential burdens upon speech because of the viewpoint being expressed are deemed content based and are subject to strict scrutiny. Such regulations are subject to the “most exacting scrutiny” and are presumptively invalid. The regulations must be necessarily related to a compelling state interest, and are so narrowly tailored to serve that end. (Boos) Additionally, the regulations imposed must not “unnecessarily circumscribe protected expression.” (White) Laws that merely regulate speech with no concern to its content are subject to an intermediate scrutiny test. Whenever the government seeks to regulate speech in public places it must be subject matter neutral. The City of Post Game: Prof mentioned there was a slight confusion between Content Based restrictions and viewpoint based restrictions, but other than that no problem. (4/21/07) Labels: Finals Blogging Series
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
