Freedom of Expression in the Supreme Court: The Defining CasesTerry Eastland Rowman & Littlefield, 2000 - 397 pages In Freedom of Expression in the Supreme Court, Terry Eastland brings together the Court's leading First Amendment cases, some 60 in all, starting with Schenck v. United States (1919) and ending with Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1998). Complete with a comprehensive introduction, pertinent indices and a useful bibliography, Freedom of Expression in the Supreme Court offers the general and specialized reader alike a thorough treatment of the Court's understanding on the First Amendment's speech, press, assembly, and petition clauses. |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 94
Page x
... present , in abridged form , the Court's opinion and any concurring or dissenting opinion that especially sheds light on disputed issues . As in other areas of constitutional law , certain concurrences and dissents in First Amendment ...
... present , in abridged form , the Court's opinion and any concurring or dissenting opinion that especially sheds light on disputed issues . As in other areas of constitutional law , certain concurrences and dissents in First Amendment ...
Page xvii
... present petitions " to it " in case of grievance , " and it was understood that com- moners would join together in preparing to present petitions . In the colonies and then the states this notion of meeting to prepare petitions came to ...
... present petitions " to it " in case of grievance , " and it was understood that com- moners would join together in preparing to present petitions . In the colonies and then the states this notion of meeting to prepare petitions came to ...
Page xx
... present to Napoleon Bonaparte . An issue from this case was later reviewed by the Supreme Court in United States v . Hudson , which asked whether the federal courts have a common - law jurisdiction in criminal cases . The Court flatly ...
... present to Napoleon Bonaparte . An issue from this case was later reviewed by the Supreme Court in United States v . Hudson , which asked whether the federal courts have a common - law jurisdiction in criminal cases . The Court flatly ...
Page xxi
... present unholy war . " The ju- rors asked the presiding judge whether this criticism was indictable . Because the grand jury was soon to be discharged , the judge declined to answer . The jurors then asked that the Journal of Commerce ...
... present unholy war . " The ju- rors asked the presiding judge whether this criticism was indictable . Because the grand jury was soon to be discharged , the judge declined to answer . The jurors then asked that the Journal of Commerce ...
Page xxiii
... present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent . " In the June 1919 issue of the Harvard Law Review , Zechariah Chafee , a professor at the Harvard Law School , wrote that Holmes had ...
... present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent . " In the June 1919 issue of the Harvard Law Review , Zechariah Chafee , a professor at the Harvard Law School , wrote that Holmes had ...
Contents
V | xxix |
VI | 5 |
VII | 10 |
VIII | 18 |
IX | 22 |
X | 24 |
XIII | 30 |
XIV | 34 |
XLIV | 183 |
XLV | 190 |
XLVII | 193 |
XLVIII | 196 |
L | 207 |
LI | 216 |
LII | 233 |
LIII | 238 |
XV | 37 |
XVII | 43 |
XVIII | 45 |
XX | 49 |
XXI | 52 |
XXII | 54 |
XXIII | 63 |
XXIV | 71 |
XXV | 77 |
XXVI | 86 |
XXVII | 94 |
XXVIII | 100 |
XXIX | 105 |
XXXI | 110 |
XXXII | 121 |
XXXIII | 131 |
XXXIV | 135 |
XXXV | 142 |
XXXVI | 146 |
XXXVII | 153 |
XXXVIII | 156 |
XL | 164 |
XLI | 166 |
XLII | 171 |
XLIII | 176 |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
44 Liquormart abridgment action activities adult adult theaters advertising Amendment protection Amendment rights American applied believe Bill of Rights Blackmun Branzburg Brennan broadcast censorship Chaplinsky clause clear and present commercial speech Communist Concurring conduct Congress constitutionally conviction Court of Appeals criminal decided decision DELIVERED THE OPINION dissent doctrine effect exercise expression fact federal fighting words flag Fourteenth Amendment free speech freedom of speech governmental interest Holmes ideas incite issue judgment jury justify legislative libel liberty limited material means ment newspaper obscenity officials ordinance Paris Adult Theatre Party peace person petitioners police political present danger prior restraint prohibition proscribed provisions punish question reason regulation Rehnquist Renton requires responsibility restraint restriction sexual speaker standards State's statute substantial substantive evil suppression Supreme Court Terminiello tion trial U.S. Supreme Court unconstitutional United utterance violation York York Times Co