Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court primarily addressed the matter of whether government regulation of broadcasting content comports with the free speech rights of broadcast operators under the First Amendment. [7] The high court ruled 5–4 in favor of the FCC, holding that the Carlin routine was "indecent but not obscene". Therefore, the Commission could not ...
Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 576 U.S. 155 (2015), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court clarified when municipalities may impose content-based restrictions on signage. The case also clarified the level of constitutional scrutiny that should be applied to content-based restrictions on speech.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in the initial case ([6]) that the FCC cannot punish broadcast stations for such incidents. [7] The FCC appealed to the Supreme Court, [8] and in the 2009 case, the Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit, [9] finding that the new policy was not arbitrary. However, the issue of ...
The Supreme Court issued a ruling invalidating the ordinance and held: (a) The ordinance by discriminating among movies solely on the basis of content has the effect of deterring drive-in theaters from showing movies containing any nudity, however innocent or even educational, and such censorship of the content of otherwise protected speech cannot be justified on the basis of the limited ...
The Supreme Court heard the updated case, now known as Turner II, in late 1996. Acknowledging the cable companies' compelled speech argument, the Supreme Court analyzed the must-carry regulations under the more demanding strict scrutiny analysis to determine if the companies' free speech rights were violated. This time, the Supreme Court ruled ...
The Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) was passed by Congress in 2000. CIPA was Congress's third attempt to regulate obscenity on the Internet, but the first two (the Communications Decency Act of 1996 and the Child Online Protection Act of 1998) were struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional free speech restrictions, largely due to vagueness and overbreadth issues that ...
In 2008, Stevens was among four dissenters in the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in a landmark case, District of Columbia v. Heller , that held the Second Amendment protects an individual’s ...
Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al., 484 U.S. 260 (1988), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which held, in a 5–3 decision, that student speech in a school-sponsored student newspaper at a public high school could be censored by school officials without a violation of First Amendment rights if the school's actions were "reasonably related" to a ...