The plaintiff, a former superintendent, claimed she was demoted and then fired for
exercising protected speech when she complained about allegedly illegal conduct by the district.
Not exact matches
I'm reading NFIB v. Sebelius (the Obamacare decision) in preparation for teaching the case to my constitutional law students and came across the following most interesting passage in in Justice Ginsburg's opinion: «A mandate to purchase a particular product would be unconstitutional if, for example, the edict impermissibly abridged the freedom of
speech, interfered with the free
exercise of religion, or infringed on a liberty interest
protected by the Due Process Clause.»
Lively, with representation by Liberty Counsel (an evangelical legal organization), responded that in both the U.S. and Uganda he
exercised constitutionally
protected speech rights; that he opposes violence and neither committed nor plotted any; that Uganda did not in fact pass a proposed draconian anti-gay law, and that in any case Uganda's political institutions, instead of himself, are responsible for its political decisions; and that the court lacks jurisdiction and the plaintiffs lack standing.
The First Amendment Defense Act can and should
protect the free
exercise of religion without ignoring the freedom of
speech, press and assembly for the non-observant as well as the devout.
In a statement, Broglio's office said: «Archbishop Broglio and the Archdiocese stand firm in the belief, based on legal precedent, that such a directive from the Army (about not reading the letter) constituted a violation of his Constitutionally -
protected right of free
speech and the free
exercise of religion, as well as those same rights of all military chaplains and their congregants.»
HappyMeal The right of a woman to control her own reproductive life is like the right to free
speech: You don't have to agree with how people
exercise that right to still want to
protect their right to do it.
«When our government criminalizes the very free
speech that the First Amendment was written to
protect, sends people to prison for simply
exercising their constitutional rights, and wields its power like a weapon against political enemies, we are all in trouble.»
«While we recognize the obligation to
protect against hate
speech that constitutes incitement to hostility, discrimination or violence, this should not be used as a pretext to clampdown on legitimate
exercise of the right to freedom of expression that does not constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.
«The Federal Protective Service stands with it partners within the Portland community to ensure the peaceful
exercise of individual freedoms of demonstration and
speech, while preserving and
protecting the safety of all individuals on federal property,» said Robert Sperling, Director of Communications and Engagement for the Federal Protective Service.
Plainly, I believe in the freedom of the press and freedom of
speech in this country, even when it is sometimes
exercised provocatively, as it is supposed to be in a free country, but there are also areas where an individual is entitled to have their privacy
protected.
This means that excluding religious schools may violate not one but three separate constitutional provisions: the equal protection clause, the free
exercise clause (which
protects the free
exercise of religion), and the free
speech clause.
As I understand their argument, it is this: The Blaine amendments have the effect of restricting the constitutionally
protected rights of freedom of
speech and the free
exercise of religion
protected in the 1st and 14th Amendments.
Those in favor of his suspension generally point out that America's 1st Amendment guarantee of free
speech only
protects you from government interference regarding political
speech (and does not prevent employers from
exercising their rights to discipline employees), whereas those defending Robertson have been quick to lament the knee - jerk reaction to those expressing counter-progressive cultural beliefs in a very clumsy fashion, and claim there is a double standard in which politically unpopular conservative viewpoints are quicker to result in job terminations than politically unpopular liberal viewpoints that are also clumsily expressed.
In particular, Gates refers to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which
protects freedom of
speech, the right to peaceably assemble, and the free
exercise of religion.
Jackson said Mckesson was
exercising his constitutional rights of association and
speech during the demonstration, and there was no evidence he had «exceeded the bounds of
protected speech.»
Basically, this is to
protect people who are
exercising legal free
speech and fair use rights from suffering legal burdens of fighting a case where the plaintiff alleges copyright or defamation charges against defendant when that is of extremely questionable grounds.