Legal Reasoning: First Amendment Case Law - HASO9

• Title: Legal Reasoning: First Amendment Case Law
• Guaranteed by: International Office (22-ZO)
• Faculty: Faculty of Law
• Actual: from 2021 to 2023
• Semester: winter
• Points: 0
• E-Credits: 3
• Examination process: winter s.:
• Hours per week, examination: winter s.:1/0, Ex [HT]
• 4EU+: no
• Virtual mobility / capacity: no
• State of the course: taught
• Language: English
• Teaching methods: full-time
• Teaching methods: full-time
• Note: course can be enrolled in outside the study plan; enabled for web enrollment
• Guarantor: Sean Davidson, J.D.
• Teacher(s): Sean Davidson, J.D.

Annotation

Last update: Ing. Svatava Marešová (19.10.2022)

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution safeguards freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and freedom of press, and also protects the principle of separation of church and state. Studying the judicial interpretation of the First Amendment is fundamental to understanding constitutional law in the United States, as many important and controversial high court cases have concerned the First Amendment, especially in recent years.

This course focuses on U.S. Supreme Court decisions in selected First Amendment cases, including the arguments asserted and reasoning applied. Students are required to assess these cases and make legal arguments in seminar discussions and also formal moot court debate exercises. In particular, the cases in this course concern the following topics: symbolic expression, extremist expression, political satire, threatening speech, speech rights of students, establishment of religion, and exercise of religion. This course also takes a comparative approach to studying many of the decisions, especially those which are inconsistent with the decisions of European courts in similar cases. Cultural differences and implications are naturally considered as well.

The objectives of this course include the following: 1) to deepen students’ understanding of U.S. interpretation of freedom of expression and religion; 2) to provide context for students to compare and assess various approaches to such issues; 3) to provide a framework for students to evaluate the applicability and merits of First Amendment legal arguments in potential future cases; 4) to aid students in acquiring and using sophisticated legal English vocabulary and grammar.

Requirements to the exam

Last update: Ing. Svatava Marešová (19.10.2022)

-Two hour essay exam (analysis of cases and open essay prompts)   Course Requirements: 1)Attend 7/10 lessons; and 2) Obtain at least 55/100 assessment points (see below)  Course Marks:     (regular curriculum students):  1: 89-100       2: 75-89        3: 55-74        (Erasmus students):   A: 90-100      B: 81-89     C: 72-80     D: 63-71     E: 55-62       Assessment Criteria for Marks: Moot Court Activity: 35% Final Written Exam: 60% Preparation for classes: 5% Means of communication: This course is taught in person. (In case distance learning is required due to government closure of universities, then Zoom will be used.)

Syllabus

Last update: Ing. Svatava Marešová (19.10.2022)

Week 1:  intro to the First Amendment ·         principles of freedom of speech/expression ·         what constitutes speech/expression Week 2:  hate speech /extremist expression under the First Amendment ·         incitement principle: Brandenburg v. Ohio (speech of KKK) ·         The Skokie controversy Week 3:  ECtHR case analysis ·         Norwood v. United Kingdom  (hostility toward a religious group) ·         Perincek v. Switzerland  (Armenian genocide denial) ·         Waldron’s “dignity” argument Week 4:  threatening speech ·         true threats principle:  Planned Parenthood v. ACLA (controversial anti-abortion website) Week 5:  personally offensive speech ·         Hustler v. Falwell (satire involving public figures) ·         Snyder v. Phelps (funeral protest) Week 6:  symbolic speech ·         U.S. v. O’Brien (burning of the draft card) ·         Texas v. Johnson (flag burning) Week 7: student speech rights in public schools ·         Tinker v. Des Moines (armband political protest) ·         Bethel v. Fraser (lewd and indecent speech) ·         Morse v. Frederick (drug reference) Week 8: First Assessment – Moot Court  ·         [two teams of 3 lawyers – all other students are judges] Week 9: prohibition of establishment of religion  ·         approaches to secularism ·         secularism in schools:  Wallace v. Jaffree, Lee v. Weisman Week 10: free exercise of religion ·         Employment Division v. Smith (drug use in religious ritual) ·         Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah (animal sacrifice)           Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado (cake for same-sex wedding refusal)

Course Goals / Learning Outcomes: The objectives of this course include the following: 1) to deepen students’ understanding of U.S. interpretation of freedom of expression and religion; 2) to provide context for students to compare and assess various approaches to such issues; 3) to provide a framework for students to evaluate the applicability and merits of First Amendment legal arguments in potential future cases; 4) to aid students in acquiring and using sophisticated legal English vocabulary and grammar.

Learning resources

Last update: Sean Davidson, J.D. (17.09.2021)

Supplemental Literature:

 

Stone, Geoffrey R. (Editor, 2008). The First Amendment. Aspen Publishers.

 

Irons, Peter (Editor, 1997). May it Please the Court: The First Amendment. New York: The New Press.

 

Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief.