Mediaboss Marketing

Is the First Amendment Under Attack?

Updated: 3:16 PM CDT May 5, 2017

The first amendment is being challenged on all sides freedom of religion is being tested in the Supreme Court, protests are keeping conservative pundits away from liberal campuses, and the White House is threatening a crackdown on the press. Over thirty tweets bashing the media have been sent out by President Donald Trump since inauguration. Besides condemning mainstream media as fake news, he also suggested the loosening of libel laws, something he called for on the campaign trail. But does the president have that authority or influence? First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams says no the federal government has no power over libel laws which differ for each state. Abrams, best known for his defense of the New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case, has published his latest book, The Soul of the First Amendment. He joins Soledad OBrien to explain the intersection of free speech and the right to protest, the beginnings of the First Amendment, and the case a former president could have against the current one.

WEBVTT SOLEDAD: I'M SOLEDAD O'BRIEN.WELCOME TO "MATTER OF FACT."THE 45 WORDS THAT MAKE UP THEFIRST AMENDMENT ARE BEING TESTEDBY THE 140 CHARACTERS OFTWITTER.AT LEAST, THE PRESIDENT'STWITTER.PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ANTI-MEDIAPOSTS AND CHIEF OF STAFF REINCPRIEBUS' ADMISSION THAT THEWHITE HOUSE IS LOOKING INTOOPENING LIBEL LAWS COULD POSE ATHREAT TO FREEDOM OF THE PRESS,SUGGESTING RETALIATION FOR NEWSCOVERAGE CONSIDERED SLANTED.ONE LEGAL SCHOLAR SAYS THEPRESIDENT'S TRAIL OF TWEETSCOULD ACTUALLY PROTECT THE MEDIAPROVING HIS INTENT TO PUNISHJOURNALISTS BY USING THE LEGALSYSTEMFLOYD ABRAMS HAS WRITTEN A NBOOK.IT IS CALLED "THE SOUL OF THEFIRST AMENDMENT," TO RE-EDUCATEUS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OFPROTECTING SPEECH -- EVEN WHENWE FIND IT OFFENSIVE.ABRAMS ARGUED AT THE SUPREMECOURT ON BEHALF OF THE "NEW YORKTIMES" IN THE PENTAGON PAPERSCASE DURING THE NIXONADMINISTRATION AND HAS BEEN BACKIN COURT MANY TIMES SINCDEFENDING REPORTERS AND EDITORS.IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU, SIR.THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. YOU START THE BOOK WITH FASCINATING LOOK AT OUR NATION'SFOREFATHER1787, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THEWENT BACK AND FORTH ON THEPHRASING. ORIGINALLY, THEY TALKED ABOUTTHE PEOPLE'S RIGHT ANDEVENTUALLY IT SHIFTED TO WHATCONGRESS COULDN'T DO. WHY DOES THE NUANCE MATTERFLOYD: IT MATTERS BECAUSE THELANGUAGE WE WOUND UP WITH --EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING -"CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAWCONGRESS LATER BECAME THEPRESIDENT ALSO AND THE STATESALSOBUT IT BECAME CLEAR A BAN, ABAR, A LIMITATION ON GOVERNMENT,WHICH IS THE STUFF OF LAW. THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS A LAWIT IS NOT A POEM, NOTASPIRATIONAL, NOT JUST A HOPEFOR THE FUTURE. IF YOU PHRASE IT THE OTHER WAY,IF YOU SAY PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BEDENIED THEIR RIGHTS, IT SOUNDAS IF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING --WOULDN'T THAT BE A GOOD IDEA?SO THEY DELIBERATELY MADE ITSTRONGER, BY MAKING IT NARROWER."CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAWABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECHOR OF THE PRESS."SOLEDAD: YET WE ARE CONSTANTGOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUTWHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING ISPROTECTED BY THE FIRSTAMENDMENT, FOR SOMETHING THATWAS SUPPOSED TO BE KIND OFSTRONG. DO YOU WORRY ABOUT PRESIDENTTRUMP, WHO HAS MADE HIS DISTASTEFOR BOTH JOURNALISTS AND THEFIRST AMENDMENT PRETTY CLEAR?FLOYD: WELL, YES I AM WORRIEDABOUT IT. I THINK SOME AREAS HE'S TALKEDABOUT HE REALLY CAN'T AND WON'TBE ABLE TO GET INTO, LIKE LIBELLAW. HE HAS SAID HE WANTS TO LOOSENTHE LIBEL LAW. BUT THERE IS NO FEDERAL LIBELLAW. THERE IS NO UNITED STATES LIBELLAW. WE HAVE 50 STATES, THEY HAVELIBEL LAWS. THERE IS NO ROLE FOR THEPRESIDENT OR THE CONGRESS ABOUTLIBEL LAW. AND OF COURSE, IT IS THE FIRSTAMENDMENT WHICH PROTECTS AGAINTHE STATE LIBEL LAWS SO AS TOMAKE IT REALLY HARD FOR APRESIDENT OR A PUBLIC OFFICIALOR A PUBLIC FIGURE TO WIN LIBEL CASE, PURPOSELY.LIBEL LAW ONLY APPLIES TO FALSSTATEMENTS OF FACT, NOT OPINION.NOW AN EXAMPLE, PRESIDENT OBAMACOULD SUE OUR PRESIDENT AND SAY,"YOU SAID I COMMITTED A CRIMINALACT BY WIRETAPPING YOU, AND ITIS NOT TRUE."THAT IS A LAWSUIT.SOLEDAD: THE FORMER PRESIDENTCOULD SUE THE CURRENT PRESIDENTFOR LIBEL? THAT WOULD BE -- FLOYD: THAT WOULD BE A GREATLAWSUIT.SOLEDAD: WOW, WOW. CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS WILL BEGOING CRAZY OVER THAT.LET'S TALK ABOUT PROTESTS ONCOLLEGE CAMPUSESMOST RECENT ONE IS ANN COULTERSUPPOSED TO SPEAK AT BERKELEY,IT SORT OF BECAME THIS BIG FREESPEECH DEBATE. EVEN THOUGH SHE NEVER SPOKE ANSHE WITHDREW, PROTESTERS MADE ITCLEAR, AND I AM ROUGHLYPARAPHRASING, THAT SHE ISCONSERVATIVE AND SHE DOESN'TDESERVE TO SPEAK HERE. PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE BERKELEY ISA PUBLIC UNIVERSITY.FLOYD: RIGHT. PUBLIC UNIVERSITY AND THEREFORESUBJECT TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT. WE TREAT PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES ASIF THEY WERE THE CONGRESS. AND SO, IF A PUBLIC UNIVERSITREATS HER DIFFERENTLY BECAUSESHE IS CONSERVATIVE OR BECAUSESHE IS OUTRAGEOUS, THERE COULDBE A LAWSUITSOLEDAD: SO IF SOMEBODY HAS ARIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, AND WEKNOW THAT PEOPLE WHO APROTESTING, THAT IS ALSO A FORMOF FREE SPEECH AND THEY HAVE THERIGHT TO PROTEST, WHERE IS THELINE? THEY BOTH HAVE A RIGHT.FLOYD: THEY DO BOTH HAVE ARIGHT. AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO HECKLE.WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TOIS TO SHUT PEOPLE UP. THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO BE SLOUD, OR SO CONTINUING, OR SOTHREATENING THAT THE SPEECHSIMPLY CAN'T GO ON.UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS WHAT HASHAPPENED TOO OFTEN ON COLLEGECAMPUSES AROUND AMERICWE CAN'T JUST SAY THESE COLLEGESTUDENTS DON'T KNOW WHAT THEYARE DOING. WE HAVE TO TEACH THEM IN JUNIORHIGH SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL, ANDWE DO NEED CIVICS COURSE. WE DO NEED A LESSON ON AMERICANLIBERTY ON A CONTINUING BASISFROM THE TIME PEOPLE ARE KIDS.SOLEDAD: FLOYD ABRAMS, IT IS SO

See original here:
Is the First Amendment Under Attack? - KETV Omaha

By all means enjoy a mint julep on Derby Day, but placing your bets on the first race of the Triple Crown series is a time for sober calculation. For Kentucky Derby neophytes, CBS Sports has this handy breakdown of all the main betting terms you'll need to understand at the track:

Win: Pick the horse that wins the race

Place: Pick a horse that finishes first or second

Show: Pick a horse that finishes first, second, or third

Daily Double: Pick the winners of two races

Exacta: Pick the first and second-place finishers in the correct order

Exacta Box: Pick the first and second-place finishers in no particular order

Trifecta: Pick the first, second, and third-place finishers in the correct order

Trifecta Box: Pick the first, second, and third-place finishers in no particular order

Superfecta: Pick the first, second, third, and fourth-place finishers in the correct order

Superfecta Box: Pick the first, second, third, and fourth-place finishers in no particular order [CBS Sports]

As for which horses to pick (assuming you're not choosing on name quality alone), Andrew Beaton at FiveThirtyEight explains that new rules for determining which 20 Thoroughbreds get to run has made the race more predictable in recent years, even though the contest remains volatile compared to comparable races. That new dynamic means "the best betting strategy for this years Derby may also be the dumbest one," Beaton says, namely: "Bet on Classic Empire," the favorite to win.

Coverage of the Derby begins at 2:30 p.m. ET Saturday on NBC. The race itself, "The Most Exciting Two Minutes in Sports," is scheduled for 6:46 p.m. ET. Bonnie Kristian

Read this article:
changing the first amendment - theweek.com

Is the First Amendment Under Attack?

Updated: 4:16 PM EDT May 5, 2017

The first amendment is being challenged on all sides freedom of religion is being tested in the Supreme Court, protests are keeping conservative pundits away from liberal campuses, and the White House is threatening a crackdown on the press. Over thirty tweets bashing the media have been sent out by President Donald Trump since inauguration. Besides condemning mainstream media as fake news, he also suggested the loosening of libel laws, something he called for on the campaign trail. But does the president have that authority or influence? First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams says no the federal government has no power over libel laws which differ for each state. Abrams, best known for his defense of the New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case, has published his latest book, The Soul of the First Amendment. He joins Soledad OBrien to explain the intersection of free speech and the right to protest, the beginnings of the First Amendment, and the case a former president could have against the current one.

WEBVTT SOLEDAD: I'M SOLEDAD O'BRIEN.WELCOME TO "MATTER OF FACT."THE 45 WORDS THAT MAKE UP THEFIRST AMENDMENT ARE BEING TESTEDBY THE 140 CHARACTERS OFTWITTER.AT LEAST, THE PRESIDENT'STWITTER.PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ANTI-MEDIAPOSTS AND CHIEF OF STAFF REINCPRIEBUS' ADMISSION THAT THEWHITE HOUSE IS LOOKING INTOOPENING LIBEL LAWS COULD POSE ATHREAT TO FREEDOM OF THE PRESS,SUGGESTING RETALIATION FOR NEWSCOVERAGE CONSIDERED SLANTED.ONE LEGAL SCHOLAR SAYS THEPRESIDENT'S TRAIL OF TWEETSCOULD ACTUALLY PROTECT THE MEDIAPROVING HIS INTENT TO PUNISHJOURNALISTS BY USING THE LEGALSYSTEMFLOYD ABRAMS HAS WRITTEN A NBOOK.IT IS CALLED "THE SOUL OF THEFIRST AMENDMENT," TO RE-EDUCATEUS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OFPROTECTING SPEECH -- EVEN WHENWE FIND IT OFFENSIVE.ABRAMS ARGUED AT THE SUPREMECOURT ON BEHALF OF THE "NEW YORKTIMES" IN THE PENTAGON PAPERSCASE DURING THE NIXONADMINISTRATION AND HAS BEEN BACKIN COURT MANY TIMES SINCDEFENDING REPORTERS AND EDITORS.IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU, SIR.THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. YOU START THE BOOK WITH FASCINATING LOOK AT OUR NATION'SFOREFATHER1787, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THEWENT BACK AND FORTH ON THEPHRASING. ORIGINALLY, THEY TALKED ABOUTTHE PEOPLE'S RIGHT ANDEVENTUALLY IT SHIFTED TO WHATCONGRESS COULDN'T DO. WHY DOES THE NUANCE MATTERFLOYD: IT MATTERS BECAUSE THELANGUAGE WE WOUND UP WITH --EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING -"CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAWCONGRESS LATER BECAME THEPRESIDENT ALSO AND THE STATESALSOBUT IT BECAME CLEAR A BAN, ABAR, A LIMITATION ON GOVERNMENT,WHICH IS THE STUFF OF LAW. THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS A LAWIT IS NOT A POEM, NOTASPIRATIONAL, NOT JUST A HOPEFOR THE FUTURE. IF YOU PHRASE IT THE OTHER WAY,IF YOU SAY PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BEDENIED THEIR RIGHTS, IT SOUNDAS IF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING --WOULDN'T THAT BE A GOOD IDEA?SO THEY DELIBERATELY MADE ITSTRONGER, BY MAKING IT NARROWER."CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAWABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECHOR OF THE PRESS."SOLEDAD: YET WE ARE CONSTANTGOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUTWHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING ISPROTECTED BY THE FIRSTAMENDMENT, FOR SOMETHING THATWAS SUPPOSED TO BE KIND OFSTRONG. DO YOU WORRY ABOUT PRESIDENTTRUMP, WHO HAS MADE HIS DISTASTEFOR BOTH JOURNALISTS AND THEFIRST AMENDMENT PRETTY CLEAR?FLOYD: WELL, YES I AM WORRIEDABOUT IT. I THINK SOME AREAS HE'S TALKEDABOUT HE REALLY CAN'T AND WON'TBE ABLE TO GET INTO, LIKE LIBELLAW. HE HAS SAID HE WANTS TO LOOSENTHE LIBEL LAW. BUT THERE IS NO FEDERAL LIBELLAW. THERE IS NO UNITED STATES LIBELLAW. WE HAVE 50 STATES, THEY HAVELIBEL LAWS. THERE IS NO ROLE FOR THEPRESIDENT OR THE CONGRESS ABOUTLIBEL LAW. AND OF COURSE, IT IS THE FIRSTAMENDMENT WHICH PROTECTS AGAINTHE STATE LIBEL LAWS SO AS TOMAKE IT REALLY HARD FOR APRESIDENT OR A PUBLIC OFFICIALOR A PUBLIC FIGURE TO WIN LIBEL CASE, PURPOSELY.LIBEL LAW ONLY APPLIES TO FALSSTATEMENTS OF FACT, NOT OPINION.NOW AN EXAMPLE, PRESIDENT OBAMACOULD SUE OUR PRESIDENT AND SAY,"YOU SAID I COMMITTED A CRIMINALACT BY WIRETAPPING YOU, AND ITIS NOT TRUE."THAT IS A LAWSUIT.SOLEDAD: THE FORMER PRESIDENTCOULD SUE THE CURRENT PRESIDENTFOR LIBEL? THAT WOULD BE -- FLOYD: THAT WOULD BE A GREATLAWSUIT.SOLEDAD: WOW, WOW. CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS WILL BEGOING CRAZY OVER THAT.LET'S TALK ABOUT PROTESTS ONCOLLEGE CAMPUSESMOST RECENT ONE IS ANN COULTERSUPPOSED TO SPEAK AT BERKELEY,IT SORT OF BECAME THIS BIG FREESPEECH DEBATE. EVEN THOUGH SHE NEVER SPOKE ANSHE WITHDREW, PROTESTERS MADE ITCLEAR, AND I AM ROUGHLYPARAPHRASING, THAT SHE ISCONSERVATIVE AND SHE DOESN'TDESERVE TO SPEAK HERE. PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE BERKELEY ISA PUBLIC UNIVERSITY.FLOYD: RIGHT. PUBLIC UNIVERSITY AND THEREFORESUBJECT TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT. WE TREAT PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES ASIF THEY WERE THE CONGRESS. AND SO, IF A PUBLIC UNIVERSITREATS HER DIFFERENTLY BECAUSESHE IS CONSERVATIVE OR BECAUSESHE IS OUTRAGEOUS, THERE COULDBE A LAWSUITSOLEDAD: SO IF SOMEBODY HAS ARIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, AND WEKNOW THAT PEOPLE WHO APROTESTING, THAT IS ALSO A FORMOF FREE SPEECH AND THEY HAVE THERIGHT TO PROTEST, WHERE IS THELINE? THEY BOTH HAVE A RIGHT.FLOYD: THEY DO BOTH HAVE ARIGHT. AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO HECKLE.WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TOIS TO SHUT PEOPLE UP. THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO BE SLOUD, OR SO CONTINUING, OR SOTHREATENING THAT THE SPEECHSIMPLY CAN'T GO ON.UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS WHAT HASHAPPENED TOO OFTEN ON COLLEGECAMPUSES AROUND AMERICWE CAN'T JUST SAY THESE COLLEGESTUDENTS DON'T KNOW WHAT THEYARE DOING. WE HAVE TO TEACH THEM IN JUNIORHIGH SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL, ANDWE DO NEED CIVICS COURSE. WE DO NEED A LESSON ON AMERICANLIBERTY ON A CONTINUING BASISFROM THE TIME PEOPLE ARE KIDS.SOLEDAD: FLOYD ABRAMS, IT IS SO

See original here:
Is the First Amendment Under Attack? - WBAL Baltimore

Four California high school students who were suspended for liking and commenting on racistInstagram postshavefiled a federal lawsuit alleging administrators paraded them through the school and allowed their classmates to berate them as part of a healing exercise.

The plaintiffs were among more than a dozen students at Albany High School who were accused of liking or commenting on the posts, which showed pictures of female African Americanclassmates and the girls basketballcoach with nooses drawn around their necks. Other images showedthe girlsnext to photos of apes, according tothe Mercury News.

The posts surfaced in March, after some of the students classmates took screen shots of them and reported them to administrators at the public high school. The student who created the images not named in the lawsuit was suspended.

A complaint filed this week accuses the Albany Unified School District of going too far in suspending the other students. The lawsuit which names the school district, the school and several administrators alleges the four plaintiffswere punished in violation of their First Amendment and due process rights.

This action arises out of a private online discussion between friends that the Albany School system has pried into without authority, the lawsuit said. All conduct at issue in this matter occurred off school property, were conducted off school hours, and were otherwise completely unrelated to school activity.

Albany Unified School District Superintendent Valerie Williamssaid in a statementWednesday that the district wasreviewing the case.

The district takes great care to ensure that our students feel safe at school, and we are committed to providing an inclusive and respectful learning environment for all of our students, Williams said, as reported by the Mercury News. The district intends to defend this commitment and its conduct within the court system.

The lawsuit alleged that the plaintiffs, all juniors,were wrongfully suspended by the school in late March after some of their classmates took screen shots of the Instagram posts and reported them to administrators.

When the students returned on March 30, the lawsuit said, administrators forced them to march through the school while their peers tormented them.

School administrators allowed the student body to hurl obscenities, scream profanities, and jeer at the Plaintiffs and the other suspended students, who were all not allowed to leave what the school considered an act of atonement but was rather a thinly veiled form of public shaming, the lawsuit said.

Eventually, a parent stepped in and convinced administrators to stop the event, which was described in the complaint as a healing exercise.

Later the same day, they attended a voluntary restorative justice session organized by a community group. A few hundred students and parents gathered outside to protest. When the session came to a close, the demonstration grew tense, prompting the plaintiffs parents to ask for a police escort out, according to the complaint.

As two of the plaintiffs were leaving,an incensed demonstrator struck both of them in the head, leaving one of them with a broken nose and the other with cuts and bruises, the lawsuit alleged.

Plaintiffs have all have suffered emotional distress due to these incidents, the complaint read, including anxiety, fear, insomnia and other distress.

Thestudents want theschool to wipe their disciplinary records clean, refrain from any further punishment and allow them to make up the work they missed.

Some of the students on the receiving end of the racist posts told local media they felt threatened. The uncle and guardian of a teenage girl shown in one of the images told the Mercury Newshis nieces grades suffered after the incident.

Free speech is a fundamental right, said the uncle, who asked not to be named, but it cant be at the expense of hurting someone.

Awoman who said she was the mother of a sophomore at the school told the Mercury News:This is bullying. This is racist. This is sexist. They were attacking kids.

Read more from the original source:
Does the First Amendment protect 'liking' a racist Instagram post? Some Calif. students say it does. - Washington Post

OKLAHOMA CITY (KOKH)

The administration of Deer Creek Public Schools reports they are working directly with the ACLU to address First Amendment concerns.

Deer Creek Public Schools released a statement May 5 reporting that they "strongly support" students' First Amendment rights.

"No students were disciplined for their expression of the First Amendment. We support all students within the context of maintaining safe and orderly schools, and have policy and procedures in place to help keep all students safe." the statement said.

On May 3, the ACLU of Oklahoma claimed that an African American student from Deer Creek High School was forced to remove a shirt with the phrase "Black Lives Matter" because it was a dress code violation.

In response to the alleged incident, students planned to wear black in support of the student which led to an email to parents from Deer Creek High School Principal Melissa Jordan. The email allegedly threatened any students participating to be shown disciplinary action.

Deer Creek administration says they want a student body that is "inclusive and not divided". The district reports that all employees have gone through harassment and bullying training. Students have also gone through assemblies hoping to "further their focus on tolerance, kindness and acceptance of all students during the 2016-2017 year."

Here is the original post:
Deer Creek Public Schools addressing First Amendment concerns ... - KOKH FOX25