Friday, February 5, 2010
Civil Liberties Test
To answer the question “what happens when freedoms and protections collide?” we need to know some background information about some of the freedoms we as individuals have. We as individuals have freedoms up until they infringe on the protections of others. For example, you can say whatever you want as long as its not offensive or dangerous to others. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater because that puts others in danger.
The Tinker V. Des Moines case is a perfect example of Amendment 1 from the Constitution. Basically there was a student who wore a black arm band to protest Vietnam War. The principle said any student wearing an arm band and proceeds not to remove it, will receive suspension. The parent of the student filed a case claiming their daughter had her 1st amendment of freedom of symbolic speech violated. The parents won in the Supreme Court because the 1st amendment states that symbolic speech is ok up to the point in which it becomes a distraction and because the student was not a distraction to others, her freedom of speech was indeed violated by the Principal. This is another example of what happens when freedoms and protections collide. You have your freedoms of speech until they impede on someone else’s freedoms or protections, in this case they never did, and thus she was deemed innocent. The types of speech that are viewed as unprotected, or that would not stand up in the courts are slander, Libel, Incendiary, and Obscenities basically anything that put someone else in danger.
Directly off of freedoms of speech is the freedom to your own religion. Have the freedom by the bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) to choose what religion you wish to practice. The first amendment states this clearly, and that the government however will not endorse any one religion. Therefore if a business or school is in any way financed or supported by the government they then cannot promote any one religion either. So in the case Sante Fe V. Doe, students voted to have a school prayer before the football game after hours. The school said this is not allowed because the football game is a school sponsored event and even though it is after hours and people can choose whether or not they wish to attend the game, it is still financed by the federal government. And under the 1st amendment, the federal government will not support or sponsor any one religion. This is another example of when freedoms and protections collide. The students and all citizens have the freedom of practicing and supporting their own religion, however they have the protection of not having one promoted by the government. Therefore this freedom people have is overruled by protected the millions of others with their right to freely choosing their own religion.
The 4th Amendment addresses the topic of when government officials or law enforcement are allowed to search you or your property. There are 3 ways an officer can do so without a warrant. They are: probable cause, reasonable suspicion, and plain view. If an officer hears someone yelling for help as he walks the apartment halls, he can force his way into the apartment without warrant in response to the yelling for help. He has reasonable suspicion to suspect someone is in danger inside and needs help. Let’s say that same officer 2 days later pulls over a driver for speeding and in the passenger seat is a bag of pot, he can arrest the man and search his car because the drugs were in plain view. Now that’s different from an officer waiting outside a bar on a Friday night and pulling over the community members just because they walked out of a bar late on a Friday night that is not probable cause. A perfect case for this is New Jersey v. T.L.O. where a principle smelled smoke in a bathroom so he confronted T.L.O. in the bathroom. On doing so he now has probable cause to suspect she is causing the smoke, the principle noticed rolled up papers in her purse without going into the purse. This finding now gives authorities the right to search her locker, car, clothes to find more drugs. This search did not violate her right to the 4th amendment because the principle had probable cause to suspect the smoke was linked to T.L.O. Here is an example of when freedoms and protects collide, did the freedoms of T.L.O. to have cigarettes and other drugs put others in harm, yes, therefore her freedoms go away since thousands of others protections are in harm’s way. Again you have freedoms given to you by the constitution until; they interfere with the protections of others.
Another Amendment that demonstrates the question what happens when freedoms and protections collide is the 5th amendment. In the case Miranda V. Arizona, Miranda was arrested and never told her rights, then when they got into the courts, any information that officials were using against her before she received her rights is disregarded. This is because every citizen by this amendment must be informed of their right to stay silent, legal representation meaning you will be given an attorney if you cannot afford one, and anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. So back to Miranda, the 5th amendment protects you from self incrimination. Miranda was let go entirely with no charges because of this crucial mistake and not being read her rights. This is an example of a person’s freedoms and protection’s colliding. She is protected under the 5th amendment to not have to say anything when interrogated, she can plea the fifth. She has that freedom to act in that manner and the protection of knowing her silence can and will not be used against her. Don’t misunderstand that officials may take your silence as a sign that they know your guilty just now they need to find the evidence to prove their hunch.
The Tinker V. Des Moines case is a perfect example of Amendment 1 from the Constitution. Basically there was a student who wore a black arm band to protest Vietnam War. The principle said any student wearing an arm band and proceeds not to remove it, will receive suspension. The parent of the student filed a case claiming their daughter had her 1st amendment of freedom of symbolic speech violated. The parents won in the Supreme Court because the 1st amendment states that symbolic speech is ok up to the point in which it becomes a distraction and because the student was not a distraction to others, her freedom of speech was indeed violated by the Principal. This is another example of what happens when freedoms and protections collide. You have your freedoms of speech until they impede on someone else’s freedoms or protections, in this case they never did, and thus she was deemed innocent. The types of speech that are viewed as unprotected, or that would not stand up in the courts are slander, Libel, Incendiary, and Obscenities basically anything that put someone else in danger.
Directly off of freedoms of speech is the freedom to your own religion. Have the freedom by the bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) to choose what religion you wish to practice. The first amendment states this clearly, and that the government however will not endorse any one religion. Therefore if a business or school is in any way financed or supported by the government they then cannot promote any one religion either. So in the case Sante Fe V. Doe, students voted to have a school prayer before the football game after hours. The school said this is not allowed because the football game is a school sponsored event and even though it is after hours and people can choose whether or not they wish to attend the game, it is still financed by the federal government. And under the 1st amendment, the federal government will not support or sponsor any one religion. This is another example of when freedoms and protections collide. The students and all citizens have the freedom of practicing and supporting their own religion, however they have the protection of not having one promoted by the government. Therefore this freedom people have is overruled by protected the millions of others with their right to freely choosing their own religion.
The 4th Amendment addresses the topic of when government officials or law enforcement are allowed to search you or your property. There are 3 ways an officer can do so without a warrant. They are: probable cause, reasonable suspicion, and plain view. If an officer hears someone yelling for help as he walks the apartment halls, he can force his way into the apartment without warrant in response to the yelling for help. He has reasonable suspicion to suspect someone is in danger inside and needs help. Let’s say that same officer 2 days later pulls over a driver for speeding and in the passenger seat is a bag of pot, he can arrest the man and search his car because the drugs were in plain view. Now that’s different from an officer waiting outside a bar on a Friday night and pulling over the community members just because they walked out of a bar late on a Friday night that is not probable cause. A perfect case for this is New Jersey v. T.L.O. where a principle smelled smoke in a bathroom so he confronted T.L.O. in the bathroom. On doing so he now has probable cause to suspect she is causing the smoke, the principle noticed rolled up papers in her purse without going into the purse. This finding now gives authorities the right to search her locker, car, clothes to find more drugs. This search did not violate her right to the 4th amendment because the principle had probable cause to suspect the smoke was linked to T.L.O. Here is an example of when freedoms and protects collide, did the freedoms of T.L.O. to have cigarettes and other drugs put others in harm, yes, therefore her freedoms go away since thousands of others protections are in harm’s way. Again you have freedoms given to you by the constitution until; they interfere with the protections of others.
Another Amendment that demonstrates the question what happens when freedoms and protections collide is the 5th amendment. In the case Miranda V. Arizona, Miranda was arrested and never told her rights, then when they got into the courts, any information that officials were using against her before she received her rights is disregarded. This is because every citizen by this amendment must be informed of their right to stay silent, legal representation meaning you will be given an attorney if you cannot afford one, and anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. So back to Miranda, the 5th amendment protects you from self incrimination. Miranda was let go entirely with no charges because of this crucial mistake and not being read her rights. This is an example of a person’s freedoms and protection’s colliding. She is protected under the 5th amendment to not have to say anything when interrogated, she can plea the fifth. She has that freedom to act in that manner and the protection of knowing her silence can and will not be used against her. Don’t misunderstand that officials may take your silence as a sign that they know your guilty just now they need to find the evidence to prove their hunch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)