Freedom of Speech in the U.S. Supreme Court Jurisprudence
General data
Course ID: | 2200-1CV09-OG |
Erasmus code / ISCED: |
10.0
|
Course title: | Freedom of Speech in the U.S. Supreme Court Jurisprudence |
Name in Polish: | Freedom of Speech in the U.S. Supreme Court Jurisprudence |
Organizational unit: | Faculty of Law and Administration |
Course groups: |
Courses in foreign languages General university courses General university courses in Faculty of Law and Administration General university courses in the social sciences |
ECTS credit allocation (and other scores): |
4.00
|
Language: | English |
Type of course: | general courses |
Mode: | Classroom |
Full description: |
Classes held once a week for 90 minutes are skills oriented. Therefore presence (three absences allowed only) and active participation in class discussion are essential to complete the course successfully, although a written exam, i.e. a short essay, will be necessary to get a final grade. The course is designed as an introduction to common law. The very first freedoms of the First Amendment to the US Constitutions give only an occasion to discuss the jurisprudence and methods of the US Supreme Court. 1. Right to shocking speech? (Texas v. Johnson, 1989, and Snyder v. Phelps, 2011) 2. The history of free expression under common law. Clear and present danger? (Schenck v. US, 1919, and Abrams v. US, 1919). 3. The ‘Red Scare’ as witch-hunt? (after World War I: Gitlow v. New York, 1925, and Whitney v. California, 1927; after World War II: Dennis v. US, 1951) 4. Freedom of incitement or sedition. (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969, and United States v. Williams, 2008) 5. Expression that provokes a hostile audience reaction. (Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942, and Feiner v. New York, 1951) 6. Nazis in a Jewish town – the Skokie controversy. 7. The funeral of hate speech? (R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minn., 1992) 8. Dangerous disclosures and the national security – the Pentagon Papers. (New York Times Co. v. US; US v. Washington Post Co., 1971) 9. Right to lie under free speech? (United States v. Alvarez, 2012) 10. Buffer zones against free speech? (Hill v. Colorado, 2000, and Mc Cullen v. Coakley, 2014) 11. Speech restrictions that “does not pass strict scrutiny, or intermediate scrutiny, or even the laugh test”. (Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona, 2015; cf. Barr v. American Assn. of Political Consultants, 2020) 12. Internet as a new forum of speech. (Reno v. ACLU, 1997, and Ashcroft v. ACLU, 2002) 13. Threats on Facebook as protected free speech? (Elonis v. United States, 2015) 14. Car plates as a new forum for speech. (Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 2009, and Walker v. Texas Div., Sons of Confederate Veterans, 2015) 15. Patent and Trademark law: fighting with immoral and scandalous matters or bad words? (Matal v. Tam, 2017, Iancu v. Brunetti, 2019) |
Bibliography: |
F. Longchamps de Berier, Textbook on the First Amendment. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion, Kraków 2012. |
Classes in period "Winter semester 2023/24" (past)
Time span: | 2023-10-01 - 2024-01-28 |
Navigate to timetable
MO TU W TH WYK-SPE
FR |
Type of class: |
Specialised lecture, 30 hours
|
|
Coordinators: | Franciszek Longchamps de Berier | |
Group instructors: | Franciszek Longchamps de Berier | |
Students list: | (inaccessible to you) | |
Examination: |
Course -
Grading
Specialised lecture - Grading |
Classes in period "Winter semester 2024/25" (future)
Time span: | 2024-10-01 - 2025-01-26 |
Navigate to timetable
MO TU W TH WYK-SPE
FR |
Type of class: |
Specialised lecture, 30 hours
|
|
Coordinators: | Franciszek Longchamps de Berier | |
Group instructors: | Franciszek Longchamps de Berier | |
Students list: | (inaccessible to you) | |
Examination: |
Course -
Grading
Specialised lecture - Grading |
Copyright by University of Warsaw.