Mississippi College School of Law
Not a member yet
1198 research outputs found
Sort by
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (3) Unprotected Speech that Advocates Illegal Action-Historical Cases
No full textThe purpose of his presentation is to continue the discussion of unprotected categories of speech. Remember, generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS...and there are several unless-es. Generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS government meets the most exacting level of scrutiny. However, government may regulate the Content of Pure Speech if the speech is in an UNPROTECTED category (which government generally may regulate with a low level rational basis). The first category of unprotected speech to be presented is Speech that Advocates Illegal Action. This presentation will discuss the HISTORICAL CASES, the next presentation will discuss the modern day Brandenburg test, then a presentation will discuss a post 9/11 case about foreign terrorism. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (9) Obscenity - Unprotected Speech, with Professor Angela Mae Kupenda
No full textThis presentation is about Obscenity as an unprotected category of speech. Remember, a presentation about Obscenity does not have to be obscene. Generally, government may regulate the Content of Pure Speech if the speech is in an UNPROTECTED category (which government generally may regulate with a low-level rational basis). This presentation will examine the principles the Court has articulated as to legitimate reasons for allowing the regulation of obscenity, the modern-day test to evaluate whether speech is legally obscene, and an application of the rule to an older, but still popular, case. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (16) Expressive conduct/Symbolic speech/Speech and nonspeech elements
No full textThe First Amendment protects Pure Speech; however, Pure Conduct is not protected under the First Amendment. Sometimes, though, speech and nonspeech elements may be combined. This is also often called: Expressive conduct or Symbolic speech. This presentation explains the use of the O\u27Brien analysis using several past cases about: the destruction of a draft card during a mandatory military draft; the public burning of an American flag; and a request to sleep in tents on the Washington National Mall as a part of a protest against homelessness. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (11) More? Categories of Unprotected Speech? with Prof. Kupenda
No full textThis presentation questions whether additional types of speech should be added to the list of unprotected categories of speech. Remember, generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS government meets the most exacting level of scrutiny or IF the speech is in an UNPROTECTED category (which government generally may regulate with a low-level rational basis). The categories of unprotected speech discussed on earlier presentations are: Speech that Advocates Illegal Action, Defamation, Obscenity, and Fighting Words. This presentation will discuss cases where the Court considered whether additional categories should be added to the list of unprotected categories of speech, including speech that: includes depictions of child pornography that may not meet the legal test of obscenity; includes pornographic depictions of women that subjugates women; depicts animal cruelty, including crush videos; lies about military valor; is violent video games sold to minors; includes pornographic depictions made to look like children but are not actual children. As you will see, the Court has been hesitant to add additional categories of speech to the unprotected categories. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (28) Current 1st Amend. Conflicts-Students’ Position Statements 2021
No full textWhile the First amendment is short, there are many Court cases interpreting the amendment and many current debates. After taking an extended take home exam on all of the course material, my remote law students: selected a current First Amendment conflict they had a strong position about; researched the topic; and, wrote their own Student Position Statements where they applied the First Amendment to current conflicts we are now addressing as a nation in 2021. They are also making five minute presentations about their positions and responding to questions from classmates who may disagree with their positions. We cover from 5 to 7 position statements per day. For each class, I summarize the presentations in a video presentation (but I do not identify the students to protect their privacy). In our sixth day of presentations, the students\u27 position presentations were about: whether government can force public schools to force students to stand for the national anthem; whether government can require that the national anthem be played at professional games; whether government can prefer some art murals over other art murals; whether officers should be allowed to infringe on speech at peaceful protests because they disagree with the message; whether the Equality Act destroys religious rights; whether government asserting religion in the public sphere is in violation of the constitution; and, whether state mandated license plates should include religious expressions. Applying case law to argue their own positions AND considering the positions in opposition to their own is a further path to learning for my students. Remember, learning is a path to enlightenment and enlightenment to freedom, and freedom to justice or, at least, a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (25) Current 1st Amend. Conflicts-Students’ Position Statements 2021
No full textWhile the First amendment is short, there are many Court cases interpreting the amendment and many current debates. After taking an extended take home exam on all of the course material, my remote law students: selected a current First Amendment conflict they had a strong position about; researched the topic; and, wrote their own Student Position Statements where they applied the First Amendment to current conflicts we are now addressing as a nation in 2021. They are also making five minute presentations about their positions and responding to questions from classmates who may disagree with their positions. We cover from 5 to 7 position statements per day. For each class, I summarize the presentations in a video presentation (but I do not identify the students to protect their privacy). In our third day of presentations, the students\u27 position presentations were about: whether the former president is responsible for the January riot at the U.S. Capitol; whether certain speeches by high ranking officials are protected speech; whether a person\u27s position may insulate the person for accountability for speech; whether social media can ban a president for certain speech; whether cancel culture is a slippery slope of suppression of free speech; whether private businesses are protected from certain government regulation; and whether the First Amendment should apply to deliberate misinformation. Applying case law to argue their own positions AND considering the positions in opposition to their own is a further path to learning for my students. Remember, learning is a path to enlightenment and enlightenment to freedom, and freedom to justice or, at least, a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (20) Establishment Clause-Wall of separation between church and state
No full textThere are two religion clauses in the First Amendment: The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. This presentation focuses on the Establishment Clause, including what we know and what we don\u27t know about the direction of the Court. This presentation gives an overview of the Establishment Clause, including its purpose, the various tests used to apply it, and a discussion of the major cases. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice