Sentences with phrase «first amendment required»

Obtained dismissal on summary judgment of suit by disappointed bidder for City of Detroit cable TV franchise which claimed that First Amendment required the grant of multiple franchises

The constitutional issue arose from the District Court's view that solicitude for the First Amendment required a more hospitable judicial attitude toward granting summary judgment in a libel case.

Warren Nord's Religion and American Education has shown that the Supreme Court has sometimes held that the First Amendment requires not just neutrality between religions but neutrality between religion and nonreligion.

The religion clauses of the First Amendment require that government treat religion as special.

«We're trying to identify communities in which everyone sees what the First Amendment requires of us as citizens.»

So Cohen's request requires the court to know who his clients are; the First Amendment requires us to know.

However, he also referred to campaign ads as «pure political speech» and added that «the First Amendment requires us to err on the side of protecting speech rather than suppressing it.»

Not exact matches

No, because it would require an all - out battle against the First Amendment.

Of course, the social network is a corporation controlled by its shareholders (primarily Mark Zuckerberg), and therefore it isn't required to adhere to the free - speech dictates of the First Amendment.

«So when Trump says he wants to «open up» libel law, he really means (if he has the slightest knowledge of the law) that he wants to open up — to change — the First Amendment, which, beginning in 1964, has been held to require in cases brought by public figures, proof that what was said was false, and that the newspaper knew or suspected that it was false.

Fuchs said UF is dedicated to free speech and public discourse, but that the First Amendment does not require risk of imminent violence to students.

An amendment newly up for debate would require brokers — for the first time — to put their clients» interest ahead of their own.

The actual mixing is not required for it to be illegal in that respect, only the perceived «support» of the government that violates the First Amendment in addition to the financial and very real «support» that subversion of public resources entails.

And to ADD to it, the FACT that our founding fathers DID NOT WANT THIS TO BE ANY TYPE OF RELIGIOUS BASTION, but to be a SECULAR nation, something ELSE that the semi-illiterate are unable to learn, as that would require READING diaries and journals, you even wish to disparage our first amendment.

They require a substantive principle for interpreting the First Amendment.

The idea that the First Amendment could be the basis of a constitutionally required exemption from otherwise universal legal duties did not arrive in American law until 1963, in Sherbert v. Verner.

Realistic strategies for securing, let alone extending, the rights envisaged by those who drafted the First Amendment, if possible at all, require freedom, first of all, from the myths and shiboleths that have obscured a full view of what we are up agaFirst Amendment, if possible at all, require freedom, first of all, from the myths and shiboleths that have obscured a full view of what we are up agafirst of all, from the myths and shiboleths that have obscured a full view of what we are up against.

Totally agree — I don't see the First Amendment issue here because there was no «government action» that's required to implicate a First Amendment violation.

In other words, any school requiring students to listen to daily Bible readings or to recite the Lord's Prayer or other officially endorsed prayers is in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution and the first section of the Fourteenth AmendFirst Amendment to the Constitution and the first section of the Fourteenth Amendfirst section of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The First Amendment's free exercise protection, ruled the court, did not require the military to accommodate Captain Goldman's religious obligation.

No, they say, requiring labeling would violate the First Amendment.

The bill, which is an amendment to the state's constitution, requires that the Governor's «message shall be delivered orally in the Assembly Chamber, during the first week of legislative session, with a quorum of the Assembly and a quorum of the Senate present.»

The required first passage of the amendment occurred earlier this year.

The chances of any measure for IE reform passing in the final days appears to be slim, however, as lawmakers are yet to come to an agreement on matters generally considered to be lower - hanging fruit, such as the first passage of a constitutional amendment to require the forfeiting of pension benefits from public officials convicted of corruption.

King criticized Weiner and his fellow Democrats for requiring a two - thirds majority to pass the bill, protecting marginals from having to take a potentially dangerous vote on a GOP amendment that would prevent any first responders who were illegal immigrants from collecting the health benefits.

Cuomo has hired prominent First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams to defend him against a federal lawsuit challenging a new law that requires politically active non-profit organizations to publicly disclose their donors.

Any amendment must be passed by two consecutively elected Legislatures (in other words, an amendment first passed in 2017 couldn't receive the required second passage until 2019).

And now Democratic Congressman Sean Patrick Maloney, who represents New York's 18th district, has offered his first amendment, and it would require Congress to respond to critical disaster - relief needs within one week of a federal - disaster declaration.

«Consistent with court rulings here in Colorado and around the country, the federal court agreed that the part of Colorado election law that requires petition collectors to be state residents is unconstitutional and unduly infringes on the First Amendment rights of voters and petition circulators.»

Some Lobbyists, as well as government reform groups, say a new rule approved by New York State's ethics commission that would require them to report contact with the news media in some cases, violates first amendment rights and would have chilling effect.

The amendments also required financial disclosure by candidates for the first time and established limits on the amount of money that candidates were allowed to spend on their campaigns.

But supporters of the $ 100 million - plus borrowing deal first had to overcome a series of last - minute, head - spinning maneuvers and a flurry of amendments on the floor of the Erie County Legislature that tied up lawyers, required repeated intervention by the chairman, and prom...

A bill that requires Tennessee's public schools to set aside one minute at the beginning of the school day for «meditation, or prayer, or personal beliefs» has been signed into law by Gov. Lamar Alexander, but the American Civil Liberties Union (aclu) of Tennessee intends to file suit shortly on the grounds that the law is in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

If state courts rule that the amendment requires that religious students and institutions be treated differently than secular ones, as Martinez's ruling seems to imply, it could potentially raise a federal challenge under both the First and Fourteenth Amendments as a violation of free exercise and equal protection.

A final confrontation between Blaine Amendments and the First Amendment will require a live appeal of a decision that strikes down a voucher program by invoking a Blaine Amendment.

He was also asked whether school administrators in Sacramento County, which continue to say the Pledge on a daily basis, ever inform their students that under the First Amendment they are not required to say the Pledge.

But schools are not community hall monitors, and the Constitution requires the protection of First Amendment rights, even when they are exercised by young people of questionable judgment.

Schools have a right to require teachers to teach during school hours, Wizner said, and «teachers would have a very limited First Amendment right to participate in a walkout during school hours for a political cause.»

In 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court first held that requiring teachers to pay dues to support unions» ideological and political activities violates teachers» First Amendment rifirst held that requiring teachers to pay dues to support unions» ideological and political activities violates teachers» First Amendment riFirst Amendment rights.

The first student loan reforms took place in 1976 as an amendment to the Higher Education Act and required that debtors wait five years from the beginning of their repayment period, or demonstrate undue hardship, before their student loans were eligible for discharge in bankruptcy.

Mr. Wagner fails, yet again, to mention the fact that US government scientists have no first amendment protection, are generally required to sign confidentiality agreements, and now have an illegal federal gag order placed on them.

In my opinion, Carvin's representation was only passable when he was tub thumping about the First Amendment in a context that did not require knowledge of the facts in this case.

We already have the First Amendment, though private companies are not required to follow it.

[First category:] Characteristics such as race, caste, noble birth, membership of a political party and gender, are seldom, if ever, acceptable grounds for differences in treatment... But [second category:] the Strasbourg court has given it a wide interpretation [to Art 14], approaching that of the 14th Amendment, and it is therefore necessary, as in the United States, to distinguish between those grounds of discrimination which prima facie appear to off end our notions of the respect due to the individual and those which merely require some rational justification.»

The First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution require that all people have the power to read, speak and disseminate the law.

Some lawyers are saying the bar disregarded the First Amendment rights of its mandatory members by requiring them to subsidize political or ideological activities in violation of the Supreme Court decision Keller v. State Bar of California.

In that decision, Katz v. United States, the Supreme Court finally repudiated Olmstead and the many decisions that had relied upon it and reasoned that, given the role of electronic telecommunications in modern life, the First Amendment purposes of protecting free speech as well as the Fourth Amendment purposes of protecting privacy require treating as a «search» any invasion of a person's confidential telephone communications, with or without physical trespass...»

However, a review in 2013 in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review by Stuart Minor Benjamin indicated that the broad interpretation provided to speech under the First Amendment would require a significant reconceptioning of these constitutional principles if there was to be any extensive regulation of algorithms as proposed by Wu.

The Campaign for Tobacco - Free Kids, a proponent of the warnings, issued a statement that the ruling «ignores decades of First Amendment precedent that support the right of the government to require strong warning labels to protect the public health.»

We, by contrast, have argued consistently that in addition to those two, Eldred requires First Amendment review when Congress changes the «traditional contours of copyright protection.»