First Amendment. Public Access to Deportation Hearings. Third Circuit Holds That the Government Can Close "Special Interest" Deportation Hearings. North Jersey Media Group, Inc. v. Ashcroft, 308 F.3d 198 (3d Cir. 2002)

2003 ◽  
Vol 116 (4) ◽  
pp. 1193 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
Special Interest ◽  
Public Access ◽  
The Government ◽  
Media Group

scholarly journals Special Solicitude: Religious Freedom at America’s Public Universities

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 30
Author(s):  
William E. Thro
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Public Universities ◽  
Religious Organizations ◽  
Equal Rights ◽  
Religious Groups ◽  
Religious Expression ◽  
University Campuses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government

Rejecting the Obama Administration’s argument that the First Amendment requires identical treatment for religious organizations and secular organizations, the Supreme Court held such a “result is hard to square with the text of the First Amendment itself, which gives special solicitude to the rights of religious organizations.” (Hosanna-Tabor, 565 U.S. at 189). This “special solicitude” guarantees religious freedom from the government in all aspects of society, but particularly on public university campuses. At a minimum, religious expression and religious organizations must have equal rights with secular expression and secular organizations. In some instances, religious expression and religious expression may have greater rights. The Court’s 2020 decisions in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, and Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, reinforce and expand the “special solicitude” of religion. Indeed, Espinoza and Our Lady have profound implications for student religious groups at America’s public campuses. This article examines religious freedom at America’s public universities. This article has three parts. First, it offers an overview of religious freedom prior to Espinoza and Our Lady. Second, it briefly discusses those two cases. Third, it explores the implications of those decisions on America’s public campuses.

scholarly journals The Street Vendors Perception to the Information of Public Access Disruption as the Effect of their Existence

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3.21) ◽  
pp. 243
Author(s):  
Dorris Yadewani ◽  
Syafrani .
Keyword(s):  
Negative Impact ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Public Access ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Street Vendor ◽  
Street Vendors ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact

Street vendors is a phenomenon in almost all regions in Indonesia, which is always a positive and negative impact on the region where the street vendor activity. The positive is the economy in a sustainable life in areas where street vendor activities, while the negative effects are disturbed some public access as a result of the existence of such street vendor, such as public roads are always jammed, the sidewalk is not functioning, trash increases or the environment increasingly neglected, area aesthetics will show discomfort. For the more crowded street vendor activities will have an impact upon the producer. However street vendor unaware that what was done to give effect to society because of disruption of public facilities. It is very necessary of information for the  street vendor’s understanding and perception to the impact caused by their presence in an area. The research was conducted by qualitative method with type research field investigations and descriptive analysis of the street vendor, managers, buyers and decision makers who do trading activities in S. Parman Street, UlakKarang Padang.  Samples as research subjects were the street vendors as much as 5 people, managers, local government, the buyer and road users. The data used are primary data and secondary data. Data Collection Techniques conducted by observation, interview, and documentation while data analysis is conducted qualitatively by a descriptive approach. The findings and the results are show that the information obtained is correct in running its activities to seek fortune already utilizing public access such as sidewalk and road. Contributions to the street vendors are expected to have awareness in running its activities mainly on the utilization of public access and if you want to keep running its activities must be willing to abide by all the regulations set forth by the government, because it became a street vendor answers to some of the problems faced by street vendors as well as for the government attempted to manage and regulate the existence of street vendors to be in line with policies that have been set by the government for street vendors somehow able to overcome the problem of the existence of the public economy. 

Saving the News

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha Minow
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Government Accountability ◽  
Market Failures ◽  
Truth Telling ◽  
Private Industry ◽  
Government Action ◽  
Digital Platforms ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Government

This book argues that US democracy presumes a news industry but that industry currently is failing. It focuses on the contributions of digital platforms and legal rules to the current situation and on the government's responsibilities for alleviating the problem. As the book shows, the First Amendment of the US Constitution assumes the existence and durability of a private industry. Despite some concerns that government action now is not permitted, nothing in the Constitution forecloses government action to regulate concentrated economic power, to require disclosure of who is financing communications, or to support news initiatives where there are market failures. Moreover, the federal government always been involved in shaping the media environment; it has contributed financial resources, laws, and regulations to develop and shape media in the United States. The government has subsidized development of the internet and crafted legal immunities for digital platforms; the government has crafted the direction and contours of America's media ecosystem. The shift of people’s attention to media platforms that borrow news stories without paying for them and spread misinformation jeopardizes journalism, reliable news sources, and the very respect for truth-telling. To maintain government accountability and inform a public as required in a democracy, The book outlines an array of reforms, including a new fairness doctrine, regulating digital platforms as public utilities, using antitrust authority to regulate the media, policing fraud, and more robust funding of public media. As the text stresses, such reforms are not merely plausible ideas; they are the kinds of initiatives needed if the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of the press continues to hold meaning in the twenty-first century.

Parades, Picketing, and Demonstrations

2021 ◽  
pp. 368-388
Author(s):  
Timothy Zick
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Civic Engagement ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
Collective Modes ◽  
Individual Autonomy ◽  
The Government

This chapter focuses on parades, pickets, and demonstrations, which are forms of civic engagement that communicate aspirations, ideas, and, quite often, dissenting opinions to fellow citizens, governments, and broader audiences. For many, gathering together in public, in these and similar forms, is a cathartic act of self-fulfilment and a demonstration of solidarity. Collective action in the form of public gatherings is an integral part of any system of communicative freedom. In the United States, in addition to the freedom of speech, rights to ‘peaceably assemble’ and to ‘petition the Government for a redress of grievances’ are explicitly provided for in the First Amendment to the Constitution. Ultimately, parades, pickets, and demonstrations all further basic expressive values relating to self-governance, the search for truth, and individual autonomy. Nevertheless, Americans seeking to engage in collective modes of expression face a variety of doctrinal, legal, social, and political challenges. The chapter then details how digital connectivity has facilitated expressive opportunities by connecting individuals and supporting new forms of associational activity.

Freedom of Speech and Assembly in the Digital Age

2014 ◽  
pp. 160-175
Author(s):  
Sam B. Edwards III
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Warning Signs ◽  
Digital Revolution ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
First Case ◽  
The Government

The United States is facing challenges in applying First Amendment principles from the eighteenth century to modern communications. Speech and assembly in the eighteenth century was extremely limited when compared to speech now. This chapter examines two cases where the government has intruded upon fundamental rights contained in the First Amendment. In the first case, a government, in an effort to stop a protest, cut off all wireless mobile and Internet communications. This amounted to a digital gag and ear plugs for the protesters. In this case, the responsible government officials did not even contemplate that this might violate the fundamental rights of the protesters. In the second case, government employees were fired for using Facebook to “like” the page of a political candidate. The trial court ruled that “liking” on Facebook was not speech and therefore did not garner constitutional protection. These two cases represent warning signs that the United States, just like other countries, is struggling to adapt eighteenth century legal principles to modern communication. The digital revolution is happening in the United States and the courts will eventually have to develop a new set of rules based on the principles in the First Amendment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document