DRNC Scenario The author of this report is to answer to three major questions as it relates to the DRNC scenario advanced by the story that preceded it. The first question is the legal claims relating to the use of the LRAD. The second question is the basis that should be used to deny Amnesty International from getting their permit and the implications that this could cause. The final question requires

First Amendment Case Study Jonathan Zaun The disputed legality of government sponsored religious displays is a matter which must be examined through the unclouded lens provided by the Establishment Clause of the Constitution's 1st amendment. This prohibition of state sanctioned or sponsored religious activity states expressly that governing bodies shall not support or endorse any religious viewpoint through either establishment or preferential treatment. In many instances, however, public displays have been erected

First Amendment including kind cases The First Amendment is imbued with a degree of preeminence that supersedes virtually all other amendments of the United States Constitution, largely because it was the first of many. As such, its importance to the country and to protecting the rights of its citizens is largely self evident. Perhaps one of the most cogent testimonies to this fact is the numerous times this amendment has

One hypothesis is that many African-Americans yielded to the intimidation of the time and simply did not want to risk their safety and the safety of their families. 6. Poll Taxes A poll tax is a tax of a fixed amount charged each person to register to vote. (Webster's New World Law Dictionary.) as discussed previously, poll taxes were outlawed by the Twenty First Amendment. The practical effect of poll taxes

" Still, a judge has ordered the State Board of Education "not to enforce the new law while a suit filed by the father of a public school student proceeds" (Keen, 2007). Barry Lynn of the group Americans United for Separation of Church and State said the judge realizes "...that there is no motive for a moment of silence except a religious one." The First Amendment comes into play here

The decision went further to suggest that, "even if possession were to be allowed for other reasons, any law regulating the use of firearms would have to be "unreasonable or inappropriate" to violate the Second Amendment." (Oyez Project, 2008). Had the decision gone the other way, gun rights activists and gun owners would have likely felt as though their constitutional rights were under attack. The District of Columbia v. Heller