Robert Stevens Case Study

698 Words3 Pages
Amendment I 1. 559 U.S. 460, 130 S. Ct. 1577 2. Robert Stevens was convicted in U.S District Court for selling three videos depicting animal cruelty. Stevens violated the law by selling videos of pit bulls engaging in dogfights, and also attacking a domestic farm pig. In 2008, Stevens appealed his conviction arguing that the federal law reduced his right to freedom of speech included in the First Amendment. 3. Although the court found that his conviction infringed the First Amendment, dog fighting or animal cruelty is still violating the First Amendment. However, the court also argued that section 48, under which Stevens was convicted, was too broad. Therefore, section 48 is invalid in the First Amendment. 4. The U. S Court of Appeals for…show more content…
551 U.S. 393, 127 S. Ct. 2618 2. This case is best known as the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case. Frederick displayed the banner at a school-supervised activity. After being asked by Deborah Morse, the principal of Juneau-Douglas High School, to put away the 14-foot banner, Frederick claimed that he has the right to have the banner out on display. He also denied the promotion of drug use, but instead, was just trying to attract the camera passing by. Frederick was suspended from school for 10 days. 3. By displaying the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” banner, Frederick violated the school policy. Frederick appealed his suspension to the school’s superintendent, but was denied. He then appealed Juneau School Board for the suspension to be taken off from the school record, which again was denied. 4. The law did not violate the constitution. Frederick filed a civil lawsuit against Morse and the board claiming that by taking away the banner and suspending him from school violated his freedom of speech. The reason Morse took away the banner was because she was trying to prevent the illegal drug use on school ground. Despite the fact that Frederick was off from school ground, he was attending an activity that being supervised by the school. Morse was following the school policy to take away the banner. The court protected school by mentioning that they should not be afraid to do what they think would be right to do. The school has the right to stop the potential promotion of illegal drug

More about Robert Stevens Case Study

Open Document