 Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
SUMMARY
A Lesson by Linda Weber
Freedom of speech or the press did not exist in the colonies
before the Constitution. British subjects were under the
authority of the king, and the king punished dissenters. The
king also controlled the press and censored content before
it was published. After the colonists fought and won
independence from England, the rules were changed when
the Constitution was written.
Remembering the king’s actions, the Framers designed a
government with three branches and a system of checks
and balances to prevent the abuse of power. They also
made the federal government responsible for protecting
individual liberties and accountable to a separate, but all
powerful group, the People.
Thomas Jefferson viewed the press as the “only safeguard
for public liberty” and an informed citizenry as “the best
army” for the task. Freedom of the press was seen as vital
for protecting democracy so the Framers linked it to speech
and included both in the First Amendment: “Congress shall
make no law … abridging freedom of speech, or of the
press…”
Experience not only made its mark on the Constitution, but
it also affected judicial interpretations that followed. In
World War I, the Supreme Court upheld government actions
against people in the interest of national security. Over the
next 200 years, the Court would continue to grapple with
freedom of expression issues in wartime. All the while, a
watchful press would keep the public informed and debate
alive. In 1971, the Supreme Court reaffirmed freedom of the
press even in the midst of a war by allowing the publication
of the Pentagon Papers. It had come full circle in its views.
This lesson is based on the Annenberg Classroom video that
explores the evolution of the free press doctrine, Freedom
of the Press: New York Times v. United States.
Notes and Considerations
•
This lesson presumes that students have some
experience reviewing Supreme Court cases.
Snapshot of Lesson
Grades: Middle School; High School (Focus)
Subject Focus: Civics/Government
Estimated Time: 2, 50-minute classes
Alignment: National Standards for Civics and
Government Grades 5-8, Grades 9-12;
Common Core Standards: Literacy in
History/Social Studies, Science and Technical
Subjects, Grades 6-8, 9-10, 11-12
Materials/Equipment Needed:
• Annenberg Video: Freedom of the Press: New
York Times v. United States
• Computer lab
Materials Included:
Readings and Resources
• Video transcript formatted for study
• Chapters 6 & 7, Our Rights—David J.
Bodenhamer
• Chapter 8: The Pursuit of Justice—Kermit L.
Hall and John Patrick
• Civil Liberties in Wartime: Timeline
• Terms from Understanding Democracy
• USCIS 100 Civics Questions & Answers
Student Materials
• Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment
• Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
• Research Tips: Supreme Court Cases and
Opinions
• Student’s Video Guide
• Synopsis of the Story
• Visual: Track the Story Line
Teacher Materials
• Class-Prep Assignment Key
• Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
• Keys for Cases in Brief
• Visual: Track the Story Line
• Class Activity: Annenberg Survey Questions
Standards-Level Detail
• National Standards for Civics and Government
• Common Core State Standards
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
•
This is a self-contained lesson with a variety of resources and activities that can be adapted to
different lengths of classes and levels of students.
Page 2 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
TOPICS
checks and balances
civic literacy
communication and media
civil liberties in wartime
freedom of speech
democratic citizenship
information literacy
freedom of the press
judicial process
lawmaking process
rights and responsibilities of citizenship
security v. liberty
structure and function of government
Supreme Court
NATIONAL STANDARDS
Document: National Standards for Civics and Government (1994) Center for Civic Education
http://new.civiced.org/national-standards-download
Grades 5-8 Organizing Questions
The following outline lists the high-level organizing questions supported by this lesson.
I.
What are civic life, politics, and government?
A. What is civic life? What is politics? What is government? Why are government and politics
necessary? What purposes should government serve?
B. What are the essential characteristics of limited and unlimited government?
C. What are the nature and purposes of constitutions?
D. What are alternative ways of organizing constitutional governments?
II. What are the foundations of the American political system?
A. What is the American idea of constitutional government?
C. What is American political culture?
D. What values and principles are basic to American constitutional democracy?
III. How does the government established by the Constitution embody the purposes, values, and
principles of American democracy?
A. How are power and responsibility distributed, shared, and limited in the government established
by the United States Constitution?
E. What is the place of law in the American constitutional system?
F. How does the American political system provide for choice and opportunities for participation?
V. What are the roles of the citizen in American democracy?
A. What is citizenship?
B. What are the rights of citizens?
C. What are the responsibilities of citizens?
D. What dispositions or traits of character are important to the preservation and improvement of
American constitutional democracy?
Page 3 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Grades 9-12 Organizing Questions
The following outline lists the high-level organizing questions supported by this lesson.
I.
What are civic life, politics, and government?
A. What is civic life? What is politics? What is government? Why are government and
politics necessary? What purposes should government serve?
B. What are the essential characteristics of limited and unlimited government?
C. What are the nature and purposes of constitutions?
D. What are alternative ways of organizing constitutional governments?
II. What are the foundations of the American political system?
A. What is the American idea of constitutional government?
D. What values and principles are basic to American constitutional democracy?
III. How does the government established by the Constitution embody the purposes, values, and
principles of American democracy?
A. How are power and responsibility distributed, shared, and limited in the government
established by the United States Constitution?
B. How is the national government organized and what does it do?
D. What is the place of law in the American constitutional system?
V. What are the roles of the citizen in American democracy?
A. What is citizenship?
B. What are the rights of citizens?
C. What are the responsibilities of citizens?
D. What dispositions or traits of character are important to the preservation and improvement of
American constitutional democracy?
E. How can citizens take part in civic life?
Note: A more detailed standards-level alignment related to these questions can be found in the
“Standards” section at the end of this lesson plan.
Page 4 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
COMMON CORE STANDARDS
Document: English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects
Standards: Grades 6-12 Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects
http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy
Note: The activities in this lesson support learning related to the following standards. For more specifics,
please refer to the Standards section of this lesson.
Reading in History/Social Studies 6-8
Key Ideas and Details
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.1
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.2
Craft and Structure
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.4
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.6
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.7
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.8
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.9
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.10
Writing 6-8
Text Types and Purposes
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.1
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.2
Production and Distribution of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.4
Research to Build and Present Knowledge
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.7
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.8
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.9
Range of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.10
--------------------------------------------------Reading in History/Social Studies 9-10
Key Ideas and Details
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.1
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.2
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.3
Craft and Structure
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.4
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.5
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.6
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.7
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.8
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.9
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.10
Writing 9-10
Text Types and Purposes
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.1
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.2
Production and Distribution of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.4
Research to Build and Present Knowledge
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.7
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.8
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.9
Range of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.10
--------------------------------------------------Reading in History/Social Studies 11-12
Key Ideas and Details
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.1
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.2
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.3
Craft and Structure
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.4
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.5
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.6
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.7
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.8
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.9
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.10
Writing 11-12
Text Types and Purposes
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.1
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.2
Production and Distribution of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.4
Research to Build and Present Knowledge
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.7
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.8
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.9
Range of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.10
Page 5 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
STUDENT OUTCOMES
Knowledge, skills, and dispositions
Students will . . .
• Learn about the role of the press in achieving and maintaining liberty.
• Understand how and why citizens fit into our checks-and-balances system of government.
• Learn to value citizenship and the responsibility to be informed about the government.
• Trace the development and evolution of our First Amendment right to freedom of the press.
• Recognize how landmark Supreme Court decisions are a reflection of the times.
• Think critically about how technology is used to influence belief and behavior.
Integrated Skills
1. Information literacy skills
Students will . . .
• Extract, organize and analyze
information from different sources.
• Use skimming and research skills.
• Build background knowledge to support
new learning.
• Use technology to facilitate learning.
• Grapple with issues related to access
and use of information.
2. Media literacy skills
Students will . . .
• Gather and interpret information from
different media.
• Use online sources to support learning.
3. Civic Literacy
Students will . . .
• Recognize the importance of knowing
about and understanding government
processes.
4. Communication skills
Students will . . .
• Write and speak clearly to contribute
ideas, information, and express own
point of view.
• Write in response to questions.
• Understand diverse opinions and points
of view.
• Gather and interpret visual information.
• Develop listening skills.
5. Study skills
• Manage time and materials.
6. Thinking skills
Students will . . .
• Describe and recall information.
• Make real-world connections.
• Explain ideas or concepts.
• Draw conclusions.
• Use systems thinking to analyze
interactions of parts to achieve a
desired outcome
• Use sound reasoning and logic.
• Evaluate information and decisions.
7. Problem-solving skills
Students will . . .
• Discuss issues and facts.
• Analyze cause-and-effect relationships.
• Examine reasoning used in making
decisions.
• Evaluate proposed solutions.
• Grapple with difficult issues and hard
choices.
8. Participation skills
Students will . . .
• Contribute to group discussions.
• Work responsibly both individually and
with diverse people.
• Express own beliefs, feelings and
convictions.
• Show initiative and self-direction.
• Interact with others to deepen
understanding.
Page 6 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
ASSESSMENT
Evidence of understanding may be gathered from student performance related to the following:
•
•
•
Class-Prep Assignment
Responses to each part in the video guide
Class discussion and daily assignments
VOCABULARY for the LESSON
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
abridge
amendment
Articles of Confederation
authority
banned
Bill of Rights
citizenry
Congress
constitution
Constitution
crime
critical
democracy
First Amendment
Framers
freedom of speech
freedom of the press
gag
government
informed
integrity
law
parliament
printing press
prior restraint
protest
protest literature
ratified
revolution
revolutionaries
revolutionary era
revolutionary idea
Revolutionary War
rights
seditious libel
the Crown
the press
the public
Part 2: Laws Cases and Controversies
Words and Phrases
hindsight
suppress
articulate
check the government
morale
disrepute
opinion
Laws and Events
World War I
Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
Sedition Act of 1918
Espionage Act of 1917
First Amendment
Constitution
Legal and Government Terms
“marketplace of ideas”
case
“clear and present danger” test
contempt
conviction
Democratic-Republican
dissent
dissenting opinion
Federalist
Jeffersonian
judicial review
law
majority opinion
political party
prosecuted
socialist
Supreme Court
Supreme Court opinion
draft
uphold
Page 7 of 15
People to Know
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Matthew Lyon
Eugene V. Debs
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
Justice Louis Brandeis
Judicial Decisions
Matthew Lyon case
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
Schenck v. United States
Abrams v. United States
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Words and Phrases
advocate
checks and balances
classified information
“clear and present danger” standard
dissent
enjoin
evolution in doctrine
expedited
hindsight
imminent harm
First Amendment values
fourth branch of government
treason
leak
majority
manipulate
policy
top secret
undaunted
unprecedented
People and Organizations
Daniel Ellsberg
Alexander Haig
Charles Colson
Justice William J. Brennan Jr.
Justice Harry Blackmun
Justice William O. Douglas
President Nixon
Henry Kissinger
New York Times
Washington Post
Marines
Documents and Events
Vietnam War
Pentagon Papers
Resources for Definitions
•
Findlaw—Law Dictionary
http://dictionary.lp.findlaw.com/
•
Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School
Wex: All
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/all
•
National Standards for Civics and Government: Glossary
http://new.civiced.org/standards?page=stds_glossary
•
Merriam-Webster Online
http://www.merriam-webster.com/
•
Annenberg Classroom – Glossary
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/terms
•
Glossary of Legal Terms: SCOTUSblog
http://www.scotusblog.com/reference/educational-resources/glossary-of-legal-terms/
•
Glossary: United States Courts
http://www.uscourts.gov/Common/Glossary.aspx
Page 8 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
LESSON OVERVIEW
This lesson is organized to support study and learning related to the 25-minute video Freedom of the
Press: New York Times v. United States by providing a plan that can be adapted for classes of different
lengths and students of different levels. Due to the depth of prerequisite knowledge required, this
lesson divides the video into logical parts (shown below) to facilitate thoughtful reflection of the
content. The parts and their titles do not appear in the video. The transcript, however, has been
formatted to support the activities in the lesson.
Day 1 Showing
Part 1: Civic History in Brief (Start – 06:22)
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies (06:23 – 14:18)
Day 2 Showing
Part 3: New York Times v. United States (14:19 – End)
Goals:
Students will . . .
• Identify the responsibilities of government in a national state of emergency.
• Appreciate how the checks-and-balances system works to protect individual liberties.
• Discover how the government responded to the events of 9/11.
• Understand the history and importance of habeas corpus.
• Analyze how executive orders affected individual liberties in three wars.
• Consider the importance of adhering to the rule of law.
• Grapple with timely issues that affect national security and individual liberties.
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Students complete a self-assessment of civics knowledge and submit their scores before starting the
Class-Prep Assignment. This assignment builds background knowledge and understanding for
content covered in each part of the video.
DAY 1: Give and Take
Students learn how time and experience not only gave us free speech and press rights, but also
caused the government to start taking them away.
DAY 2: Back to Basics
Students learn about the landmark Supreme Court decision in New York Times v. United States and
explore the impact of the decision on the relationship between the government, the people, and the
press.
Citizenship is every person’s highest calling.
– Ambassador Walter H. Annenberg
Page 9 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
TEACHING ACTIVITIES: Day by Day
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Students complete the Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment and submit their scores before starting the
Class-Prep Assignment.
This Class-Prep Assignment provides important background knowledge for the content covered in the
video Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States. It is divided into three parts. Each part is
designed to acquaint students with the laws, cases, people, issues and terminology they will encounter
when watching the corresponding part in the video.
Before each showing, allow students enough time to complete the parts as indicated below.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 3: New York Times v. U.S.
Day 1 Showing
Day 2 Showing
Materials/Technology Needed:
• Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment
• Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes (Student Materials)
o Part 1: Civic History in Brief
o Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
• Synopsis of the Story
• Visual: Track the Story Line
• Internet access
• All resources included with the lesson
Instructions:
1. Have students complete the Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment before starting Part 1 of ClassPrep Assignment.
2. Introduce the story by using the Synopsis of the Story and preview the story line by using the
visual. Throughout the lesson, refer to the visual as needed to help students keep track of the
story.
3. Review instructions for the Class-Prep Assignment and assign Part 1 and Part 2.
* Make available all resources included with this lesson for the duration of the activities. *
Remind students to bring their work to class.
Page 10 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
DAY 1: Give and Take
Day 1 Showing
Part 1: Civic History in Brief (Start – 06:22)
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies (06:23– 14:18)
Overview: Students watch the first two parts of the video and begin to analyze how time and experience
not only gave us free speech and press rights, but also caused the government to start taking them
away.
Goal: Students will learn about role of the press in securing and defending our liberty, even in wartime.
Materials/Equipment:
• Computers with internet access
• Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States (25 minutes)
Available from Annenberg Classroom at http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/all-videos
• Video transcript: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States (In Lesson Resources)
• Supreme Court opinions in the four Guantanamo cases (In Lesson Resources)
• Research tips: Supreme Court Cases and Opinion (In Lesson Resources)
Student Materials:
• Class-Prep Assignment – Part 1 and Part 2 (completed before class)
• Student’s Video Guide
• Visual: Track the Story Line
Teacher Materials:
• Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
• Keys for All Cases in Brief (Activity in Part 2)
• Visual: Track the Story Line
Procedure:
1. Briefly review Parts 1 and 2 in the Class-Prep Assignment.
2. Distribute and review the Student’s Video Guide.
3. Show Part 1 and Part 2 of the video. Stop after Part 1 to reflect and discuss as a class or assign
questions in the video guide.
4. Use the visual to track and review the story after each part.
Homework:
Class-Prep Assignment: Complete Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Purpose: Become familiar with the case and the opinion that will be discussed in Part 3 of the video.
Remind students to bring the assignment to class.
Page 11 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
DAY 2: Back to Basics
Day 2 Showing
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Overview: Students watch the remainder of the video, which focuses on the Supreme Court case and
decision in New York Times v. United States.
Goal: Students explore the impact of the case and decision in New York Times v. United States on the
people’s right to a free press.
Materials Needed:
• Computer with internet connection
• Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Available from Annenberg Classroom at http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/all-videos
Student Materials:
• Student’s Video Guide (used on Day 1)
• Class-Prep Assignment: Part 3 (completed before class)
• Visual: Track the Story Line
• Class Activity: Annenberg Survey Questions
Teacher Materials:
• Teacher’s Video Guide & Key (used on Day 1)
• Annenberg Survey Questions & Results
Procedure:
1. Briefly review the Case Brief Chart for New York Times v. United States assigned for homework.
2. Show the last part of the video, then review the story line with the visual.
3. Conduct Three-Minute Reviews. (Instructions are provided in the Video Guide)
4. Distribute the Annenberg Survey Questions and poll the class. Compare the results to the
Annenberg survey results, then develop an interpretive analysis of the data.
Page 12 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
Have more time to teach?
1. Explore the responsibilities and challenges of 21st century citizenship.
http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework/258
2. Read and respond to this Speak Out! issue on Annenberg Classroom.
Topic: The Free Press and You: How does the First Amendment apply to student media?
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/speakout/the-free-press-and-you-how-does-the-firstamendment-apply-to-student-media
3. Gather, discuss and evaluate contemporary examples of the press exposing questionable practices
or illegal behavior by the government. (e.g., lies, secrets, deception, manipulation of facts, editing
the historical record, misuse of classified material, taking advantage of uninformed and
inexperienced reporters, etc.)
4. Develop and conduct a survey of students and adults that gathers data on media use for news and
information about the government.
5. Explore examples of conflicts between the press and the president in current and past
administrations.
6. Examine the risks and benefits of the 24/7 news cycle. Address the problems associated with giving
the public early, unsubstantiated and incomplete information.
7. Identify and discuss the challenges faced by the government, the people and the press in the midst
of the war on terror.
8. Address the problems of information overload and the struggle to stay informed in the information
age. Devise a plan for helping ordinary people become discerning consumers of the news.
9. Learn about the status of freedom of the press around the world.
Freedom House Reports
https://freedomhouse.org/reports
10. Learn about “the law that keeps citizens in the know about their government” and how it works.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
https://www.foia.gov/
11. Review codes of ethics in journalism, then analyze and evaluate the work of journalists from
different media outlets.
• SPJ Code of Ethics, Society of Professional Journalists
http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
• National Press Photographers Association: Code of Ethics
https://nppa.org/code_of_ethics
Page 13 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
RELATED RESOURCES
Annenberg Resources:
•
Understanding Democracy, A Hip Pocket Guide—John J. Patrick
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/understanding-democracy-a-hip-pocket-guide
•
Chapter 7: The Right to Freedom of the Press, Our Rights
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Rights/Chapter_7_Our_R
ights.pdf
•
Chapter 15: Freedom of the Press in a Free Society, The Pursuit of Justice
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/The%20Pursuit%20of%20Justice/
126_133_Ch_15.pdf
•
Freedom of the Press: Timelines
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/timeline/freedom-of-the-press
•
The Annenberg Guide to the United States Constitution: What It Says, What It Means
First Amendment
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/first-amendment
•
Civil Liberties in Wartime: Timeline
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/CivilLibertiesinWartime.pdf
•
Annenberg’s 2014 Civics Survey
http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/americans-know-surprisingly-little-about-theirgovernment-survey-finds/
•
Annenberg’s 2015 Civics Survey
http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/is-there-a-constitutional-right-to-own-a-home-ora-pet/
Civic Literacy
•
21st Century Citizenship: Partnership for 21st Century Skills
http://www.p21.org/our-work/citizenship
•
Annenberg’s 2014 Civics Survey
http://cdn.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Civics-survey-press-release09-17-2014-for-PR-Newswire.pdf
•
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: Civics Practice Test
https://my.uscis.gov/prep/test/civics
•
Civics (History and Government) Questions for the Naturalization Test (rev. 2/16)
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Office%20of%20Citizenship/Citizenship%20Res
ource%20Center%20Site/Publications/100q.pdf
•
iCivics Lesson: The Fourth Branch: YOU!
https://www.icivics.org/sites/default/files/Fourth%20Branch.pdf
•
Civics Renewal Network
http://civicsrenewalnetwork.org/
Page 14 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Press Freedom
•
First Amendment
https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt1bfrag1_user.html#amdt1b_hd4
http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1.html
•
Bill of Rights Institute: Landmark Supreme Court Cases—Freedom of the Press
https://billofrightsinstitute.org/educate/educator-resources/landmark-cases/freedom-of-thepress/
•
National Archives: Freedom of the Press Under Stress
https://education.blogs.archives.gov/2016/04/26/freedom-of-the-press-under-stress/
•
A Free Press
http://www.archives.gov/philadelphia/exhibits/franklin/press.html
•
Proclamation 5360: Freedom of the Press Day, May 3
https://reaganlibrary.archives.gov/archives/speeches/1985/80285c.htm
•
Speech by President Kennedy: The President and the Press: Address before the American
Newspaper Publishers Association, April 27, 1961
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Research-Aids/JFK-Speeches/American-NewspaperPublishers-Association_19610427.aspx
•
Student Press Law Center
http://www.splc.org/
•
Defenders of Freedom: The Media and You
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/educate/elections/elect5.htm
Supreme Court Resources
•
Information about Opinions
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/info_opinions.aspx
•
United States Reports: Decisions of the United States Supreme Court
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/
“In the absence of the governmental checks and balances present in other areas of our national life,
the only effective restraint upon executive policy and power in the areas of national defense and
international affairs may lie in an enlightened citizenry -- in an informed and critical public opinion
which alone can here protect the values of democratic government. For this reason, it is perhaps
here that a press that is alert, aware, and free most vitally serves the basic purpose of the First
Amendment. For, without an informed and free press, there cannot be an enlightened people.”
Justice Stewart, Concurring opinion: New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)
Page 15 of 15
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Student Materials
•
Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment
•
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
•
Research Tips: Supreme Court Cases and Opinions
•
Student’s Video Guide
•
Synopsis of the Story
•
Visual: Track the Story Line
Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment
Those applying to become U.S. citizens must pass a civics (history and government)
test as part of the process. The following questions are taken from the 100-question
list by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services updated 2/16. All questions relate
to topics in the video Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States and the
accompanying lesson.
Score Box
Assessment
Date:
Raw score:
Percent:
Instructions:
1. Check your knowledge by answering the questions before starting the Class-Prep Assignment.
2. Correct answers by using the USCIS 100 Civics Questions and Answers as a key. Your teacher can
provide you with a copy or you may access one from USCIS:
https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship/learners/study-test/study-materials-civics-test
3. Write your score in the box at the right.
4. Rate your knowledge level on a scale of 0-10. ______________________
0= No nothing 10 = Expert
Questions:
Note: The reference code following each question indicates the question number on the key.
(Q1) = question 1
1. What is the supreme law of the land? (Q1)
2. What does the Constitution do? (Q2)
3. The idea of self-government is in the first three words of the Constitution. What are these
words? (Q3)
4. What is an amendment? (Q4)
5. What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution? (Q5)
6. What is one right or freedom from the First Amendment? (Q6)
7. What did the Declaration of Independence do? (Q8)
8. What are two rights in the Declaration of Independence? (Q9)
9. What is the “rule of law”? (Q12)
10. Name one branch or part of the government? (Q13)
11. What stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful? (Q14)
12. Who is in charge of the executive branch? (Q15)
13. Who makes federal laws? (Q16)
14. What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress? (17)
Page 1 of 2
Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment
15. Who signs bills to become laws? (Q33)
16. Who vetoes bills? (Q34)
17. What does the judicial branch do? (Q37)
18. What is the highest court in the United States? (Q38)
19. How many justices are on the Supreme Court? (Q39)
20. What are the two major political parties in the United States? (Q45)
21. What is one responsibility that is only for United States citizens? (Q49)
22. Name one right only for United States citizens? (Q50)
23. What are the two rights of everyone living in the United States? (Q51)
24. What do we show loyalty to when we say the Pledge of Allegiance? (Q52)
25. What is one promise you make when you become a United States citizen? (Q53)
26. How old do citizens have to be to vote for President? (Q54)
27. What are two ways that Americans can participate in their democracy? (Q55)
28. What is one reason colonists came to America? (Q58)
29. Why did the colonists fight the British? (Q61)
30. When was the Declaration of Independence adopted? (Q63)
31. There were thirteen original states. Name three. (Q64)
32. What happened at the Constitutional Convention? (Q65)
33. When was the Constitution written? (Q66)
34. The Federalist Papers supported the passage of the U.S. Constitution. Name one of the writers.
(Q67)
35. Who was the “Father of Our Country?” (Q69)
36. Who was the first President? (Q70)
37. Name one war fought by the United states in the 1900s. (Q78)
38. Who was president during World War I? (Q79)
Page 2 of 2
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Prerequisite: Complete the Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment and submit your score.
Introduction:
The Class-Prep Assignment is designed to provide you with essential background knowledge for the
video Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States. It is divided into three parts. Each part
supports a specific section of the video.
Instructions:
1. You may work independently, with a partner, or in a study group.
Should you choose to work with others, please identify them by name below.
2. Complete the work for each of the following parts as assigned before watching the video.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 3: New York v. United States
3. Bring all related work to class to use as a reference during class discussion.
4. Use the resources at the end of each part and those made available by the teacher to complete the
work.
5. Keep a list of other reputable sources used.
Bring this assignment and all completed work with you to class.
Page 1 of 4
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
In Part 1, you will learn about the experiences, words, aspirations and interactions of people and their
government over time that led to the unabridged rights to freedom of speech and the press in the U.S.
Constitution.
Instructions:
Use the resources at the end of Part I to assist with the questions and activities.
Questions:
1. When was the printing press invented and why?
2. Describe the relationship between British subjects and the King of England during the colonial
period.
3. How did the king handle the press in England and in the colonies?
4. During the colonial period, how did the King and the people make use of the press?
5. The colonists believed the right to a free press was part of their “heritage as Englishmen.” Explain.
6. Why was the press valuable to the colonists in the revolutionary period?
7. How did the colonists get the right to a free press?
8. Quote the relevant phrase for the right to free speech and the press. Cite the source. Identify the
citation format you followed.
Restate the quote without using any of the exact words.
Activity 1: Sequence the Events
Chronology tells the story of the press from regulation to freedom. Sequence the following experiences,
events, and documents, then rewrite them in correct order. Add dates and descriptors for each item
with an asterisk (*).
____ Articles of Confederation*
____ Regulation and censorship of the press in the colonies
____ U.S. Constitution*
____ Invention and use of the printing press*
____ Bill of Rights*
____ Colonization in the U.S. by the British begins*
____ Declaration of Independence*
____ Bill of Rights*
____ Regulation and censorship of the press in England
____ First Amendment*
____ Revolutionary War* (1775-1783; war for independence)
Page 2 of 4
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Be prepared to discuss ways in which the people, the press, and their government both
changed and stayed the same over the period of time covered.
Activity 2: Design a Graphic
Freedom of expression includes freedom of speech and the press. Design a graphic, such as a Venn
diagram, that compares and contrasts the two rights.
Speech:
Press:
Both speech and press:
Activity 3: The Founder’s Own Words
Analyze the following quotes to determine what the founders said about the people, the press, the
government, and liberty. Take notes.
•
Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 16 January 1787
“I am persuaded myself that the good sense of the people will always be found to be the best army.
They may be led astray for a moment, but will soon correct themselves. The people are the only
censors of their governors: and even their errors will tend to keep these to the true principles of
their institution. To punish these errors too severely would be to suppress the only safeguard of the
public liberty. The way to prevent these irregular interpositions of the people is to give them full
information of their affairs thro' the channel of the public papers, and to contrive that those papers
should penetrate the whole mass of the people. The basis of our governments being the opinion of
the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide
whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government,
I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should
receive those papers and be capable of reading them.”
•
Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 10 December 1787
“. . . Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no
government should refuse, or rest on interference.”
•
Thomas Jefferson to Colonel Charles Yancey, Monticello, January 6, 1816
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and
never will be. The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the
liberty and property of their constituents. There is no safe deposit for these but with the people
themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information. Where the press is free, and every
man able to read, all is safe.”
•
James Madison: “The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or
to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty,
shall be inviolable.”
Page 3 of 4
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 1 Resources
•
The Annenberg Guide to the United States Constitution: What It Says, What It Means
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/a-guide-to-the-united-states-constitution
•
First Amendment Overview, Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment
•
Chapter 7: The Right to Freedom of the Press, Our Rights
Focus on the first 4 paragraphs. (Included in Lesson Resources)
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Rights/Chapter_7_Our_R
ights.pdf
•
Our Constitution: Chapter One: Why Was a Constitution Necessary?
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Constitution/Chapter%2
01_Our%20Constitution.pdf
•
Understanding Democracy, A Hip Pocket Guide—John J. Patrick
(Selections Included in Lesson Resources)
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/understanding-democracy-a-hip-pocket-guide
Additional Resources Used
Cite other reputable sources used.
Video Vocabulary for Part 1
After working through Part 1, assess your knowledge of the vocabulary words below, including multiple
meanings, as these terms will be used in video.
abridge
amendment
Articles of Confederation
authority
banned
Bill of Rights
citizenry
Congress
constitution
Constitution
crime
critical
democracy
First Amendment
Framers
freedom of speech
freedom of the press
gag
government
informed
integrity
law
parliament
printing press
prior restraint
protest
Page 4 of 4
protest literature
ratified
revolution
revolutionaries
revolutionary era
revolutionary idea
Revolutionary War
rights
seditious libel
the Crown
the press
the public
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
In Part 2, you will learn about judicial decisions that show how interpretations of the rights to free
speech and the press evolved over time.
Activity #1:
Select words from the list at the right to fill in the blanks or answer the
questions. Consult the Part 2 Resources to assist with the activity.
1. A possible war with France led the first Congress to pass the
______________and President ___________ to sign them into law.
______________was the Vice President and a leader of the
______________Party. The President was a member of the _______Party.
2. _____________ was one of the earliest people convicted of___________
under the _____________________ for writing and reading a letter critical
of President Adams and his administration’s policy toward France.
1. The power of ____________gives the ____________the power to declare
_______________ laws written by Congress and signed into law by the
President. In World War I, which laws made dissenting words a ________?
_____________________________________
2. In which cases were individuals convicted for voicing opposition to a war or
government actions? ______________________________________
3. In which cases were individuals convicted for the distribution of written
material deemed a threat by the government? _____________________
___________________________________________________________
4. In _________________, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that the
nature of the circumstances ultimately determines if one can claim
protection under the free speech clause of the _______________. When
delivering the majority opinion, ___________________ linked printed
words and spoken words and articulated a standard known as the
________________________ for determining when the government can
limit individual ________________.
5. ________________ was a _____________leader sentenced to 10 years in
federal prison for giving an anti-war speech that included criticism of the
___________.
6. When Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote his _________________in
__________________, he used the metaphor of a marketplace to explain
the value of __________________ and the free exchange of ideas.
Page 1 of 4
Vocabulary
People
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Matthew Lyon
Eugene V. Debs
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
Justice Louis Brandeis
Laws and Cases
Sedition Act of 1798
Sedition Act of 1918
Espionage Act of 1917
U.S. Constitution
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
Schenck v. United States
Abrams v. United States
United States v. Matthew Lyon
Legal & Political Terms
“clear and present danger” test
conviction
crime
Democratic-Republican
dissenting opinion
draft
Federalist
First Amendment
freedom of speech
Jeffersonian
judicial review
liberty
majority opinion
“marketplace of ideas”
opposition party
political party
prosecute
seditious libel
Socialist
the press
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Research Activity #2: Dangerous Words?
Through this activity you will learn more about four historic cases in which these people ended up being
convicted under the law and sentenced to prison for using words to oppose the federal government:
• Matthew Lyon
• Eugene V. Debs
• Charles T. Schenck
• Jacob Abrams
Cases for three of the people were appealed and heard by a Supreme Court that upheld the convictions.
One was not. Each case plays an important role in the video you will watch in class.
Instructions:
Reproduce the Case in Brief Chart below, then work with a partner or in a study group to complete 1
chart for each case before coming to class. Only complete rows 1-8 at this time.
Note: There are two categories that do not apply for one case. Write N/A and give a reason.
Case in Brief Chart
1.
Name of the Case
Which court was the final arbiter
of this case?
Vote
2.
Full Citation for the Opinion
Constitutional Issue
Decision Date
3.
Identify Opposing Parties:
4.
5.
Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time.)
b. Provide key information about each of the parties.
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties?
d. Why did the parties end up in court?
e. What claims were made by each side?
Question Before the Court:
6.
Decision of the Court:
7.
Outcome:
8.
Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both?
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. How did the decision in this case contribute to the story in the video?
10. Describe a memorable point, principle or understanding involving this case and provide a supporting
quote. Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
11. Explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
Page 2 of 4
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 2 Resources
This collection of resources is provided to assist with completing the activities in Part 2.
• Research Tips: Supreme Court Cases and Opinions (Lesson Resource)
•
Civil Liberties in Wartime: Timeline (Included in Lesson Resources)
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/CivilLibertiesinWartime.pdf
An annotated timeline containing the laws and cases covered in this assignment.
•
Chapter 6: The Right to Free Speech, Our Rights (Included in Lesson Resources)
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Rights/Chapter_6_Our_R
ights.pdf
•
Chapter 8: Limits and Latitude, The Pursuit of Justice (Included in Lesson Resources)
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/The%20Pursuit%20of%20Justice/
69_75_Ch_8.pdf
•
The Sedition Act of 1918
PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/capitalism/sources_document1.html
•
Sedition Act Trials: Historical Documents and Background: A Short Narrative
Federal Judicial Center: http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/tu_sedition_narrative.html
•
Schenck v. United States
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us47
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/249/47/
Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charles-T-Schenck
•
Abrams v. United States
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/250us616
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/250/616/case.html
PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/personality/landmark_abrams.html
•
Debs. v. United States
Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us211
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/249/211/
Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eugene-V-Debs
• United States Reports: Decisions of the United States Supreme Court
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/
(Use the citation to locate the case.)
Page 3 of 4
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Resources for Terminology
•
Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/all
•
Findlaw—Law Dictionary
http://dictionary.lp.findlaw.com/
•
Glossary of Legal Terms: SCOTUSblog
http://www.scotusblog.com/reference/educational-resources/glossary-of-legal-terms/
Additional References and Resources Used
Cite other reputable sources used.
Video Vocabulary for Part 2
After working through Part 2, self-assess your knowledge of the vocabulary words below, including
multiple meanings, as they will be used in this part of the video.
Words and Phrases
hindsight
suppress
articulate
check the government
morale
disrepute
opinion
Laws and Events
World War I
Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
Sedition Act of 1918
Espionage Act of 1917
First Amendment
Constitution
Legal and Government Terms
“marketplace of ideas”
case
“clear and present danger” test
contempt
conviction
Democratic-Republican
dissent
dissenting opinion
Federalist
Jeffersonian
judicial review
law
majority opinion
political party
prosecuted
socialist
Supreme Court
Supreme Court opinion
draft
uphold
Page 4 of 4
People to Know
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Matthew Lyon
Eugene V. Debs
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
Justice Louis Brandeis
Judicial Decisions
Matthew Lyon case
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
Schenck v. United States
Abrams v. United States
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
In Part 3, you will learn about the Supreme Court decision in New York Times v. United States (1971) and
discover how it changed the trajectory of the Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment right to
freedom of the press.
Research Activity:
1. Reproduce, then complete rows 1-8 in the Case in Brief Chart (same chart used in Part 2).
2. Use the resources at the end of Part 3 to assist with this activity.
3. Cite other reputable sources used.
Case in Brief Chart
Which court was the final arbiter
of this case?
1.
Name of the Case
2.
Full Citation for the Opinion
3.
Identify Opposing Parties:
4.
5.
Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time.
b. Provide key information about each of the parties.
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties?
d. Why did the parties end up in court?
e. What claims were made by each side?
Question Before the Court:
6.
Decision of the Court:
7.
Outcome:
8.
Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both?
Constitutional Issue
Vote
Decision Date
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. How did the decision in this case contribute to the story in the video?
10. Describe a memorable point, principle, or understanding involving this case and provide a supporting
quote. Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
11. Explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
Page 1 of 3
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Part 3 Resources:
•
Freedom of the Press: Prior Restraint
First Amendment Center
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/prior-restraint
•
Civil Liberties in Wartime: Timeline
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/CivilLibertiesinWartime.pdf
An annotated timeline containing the laws and cases covered in this assignment.
•
New York Times v. United States (1971)
Bill of Rights Institute:
http://billofrightsinstitute.org/educate/educator-resources/lessons-plans/landmark-supremecourt-cases-elessons/new-york-times-v-united-states-1971/
•
United States Reports: Electronic copies of the official printed version
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/403/403.US.713.1873.1885.html
•
New York Times Company v. United States
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873
•
New York Times Co. v. United States
403 U.S. 713 (1971)
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403/713/
Resources for Terminology
•
Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/all
•
Findlaw—Law Dictionary
http://dictionary.lp.findlaw.com/
•
Glossary of Legal Terms: SCOTUSblog
http://www.scotusblog.com/reference/educational-resources/glossary-of-legal-terms/
•
Glossary: United States Courts
http://www.uscourts.gov/Common/Glossary.aspx
•
Merriam-Webster Online
http://www.merriam-webster.com/
Page 2 of 3
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Additional Resources Used
List the names and provide links for other reputable sources used.
Video Vocabulary for Part 3
Self-assess your knowledge of the vocabulary words below, including multiple meanings. Be sure you
can identify the people, organizations, documents and events as they all play significant roles in the last
part of the story.
Words and Phrases
advocate
checks and balances
classified information
“clear and present danger” standard
dissent
enjoin
evolution in doctrine
expedited
hindsight
imminent harm
First Amendment values
fourth branch of government
treason
leak
majority
manipulate
policy
top secret
undaunted
unprecedented
People and Organizations
Daniel Ellsberg
Alexander Haig
Charles Colson
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.
Justice Harry Blackmun
Justice William O. Douglas
President Nixon
Henry Kissinger
New York Times
Washington Post
Marines
Documents and Events
Vietnam War
Pentagon Papers
Page 3 of 3
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Research Tips: Supreme Court Cases and Opinions
1. Case names and Supreme Court opinions may be written in short or long forms.
The following format variations are for the same case.
New York Times Company v. United States ← The parties in dispute are italicized.)
New York Times Co. v. United States
New York Times v. United States
New York Times Co. v. United States (1971) ← The date indicates the year of the Court’s opinion.
New York Times Company v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) ← full citation
When the official Supreme Court Opinion is recorded in United States Reports, the title includes
more information:
Source: https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/403/403.US.713.1873.1885.html
2. Every Supreme Court opinion has an official citation.
The full citation contains 5 elements: case name (names of the parties involved), year the Supreme
Court made its decision, publisher of the opinion, the volume and page number in the official
record, United States Reports.
Example:
New York Times Company v. United States ← case name in italics
403 U.S. 713 (1971)
403
Volume #
in United States Reports
U.S.
United States Reports
Initials for the publisher
of the opinion
713
Page Number
First page of the case in
the volume
(1971)
Year of Decision
in parentheses
3. There is only 1 official source for Supreme Court decisions.
• United States Reports
Official bound volumes: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/boundvolumes.html
Electronic copies: https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/
The print version trumps the electronic version should there be any discrepancies.
4. Reputable sources such as these, though unofficial, provide additional helpful information.
• Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/
• Findlaw: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court
• Cornell University Law School: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/search.html
• Justia US Supreme Court: https://supreme.justia.com/
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Synopsis
Freedom of speech or the press did not exist in the colonies before the Constitution. British subjects
were under the authority of the king, and the king punished dissenters. The king also controlled the
press and censored content before it was published. After the colonists fought and won independence
from England, the rules were changed when the Constitution was written.
Remembering the king’s actions, the Framers designed a government with three branches and a system
of checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power. They also made the federal government
responsible for protecting individual liberties and accountable to a separate, but all powerful group, the
People.
Jefferson viewed the press as the “only safeguard for public liberty” and an informed citizenry as “the
best army” for the task. Freedom of the press was seen as vital for protecting democracy, so the
Framers linked it to speech and included both in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law . . .
abridging freedom of speech, or of the press...”
Experience not only made its mark on the Constitution, but it also impacted judicial interpretations that
followed. In World War I, the Supreme Court upheld government actions against people in the interest
of national security. Over the next 200 years, the Court would continue to grapple with freedom of
expression issues in wartime. All the while, a watchful press would keep the public informed and debate
alive. In 1971, the Supreme Court reaffirmed freedom of the press even in the midst of a national crisis
by allowing the publication of the Pentagon Papers. It had come full circle in its views.
This video tells the story of how time and experience gave us the fundamental rights of free speech and
a free press and how our understanding of those rights evolved over the years.
Speakers on Screen
• Akhil Amar: Yale Law School
• Barbie Zelizer: University of Pennsylvania
• Floyd Abrams: Attorney, Cahill Gordon & Reindel
• Geoffrey R. Stone: University of Chicago Law
School
• Joanne Freeman: Yale University
• Kanji Yoshino: New York University School of Law
• Paula Franzese: Seton Hall University School of
Law
• Stephen Solomon: New York University
• Susan Herman: President, American Civil Liberties
Union
• Ted Olson: Former U.S. Solicitor General
• Vincent Warren: Executive Director, Center for
Constitutional Rights
Speakers on Audio Tape
• Alexander M. Haig, Jr.: White House Chief of Staff
• Charles Colson: Special Council to the President
• Henry Kissinger: Secretary of State
• Richard M. Nixon: President of the United States
Laws and Cases
• Espionage Act of 1917
• Sedition Act of 1798
• Sedition Act of 1918
• U.S. Constitution
• Abrams v. United States
• Debs v. United States
• Marbury v. Madison
• New York Times v. United States
• Schenck v. United States
• United States v. Matthew Lyon
Page 1 of 10
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Preparation for Viewing and Study
Carry out steps 1 and 2 several days before watching the video.
Materials Needed:
• Class-Prep Assignment
• Synopsis of the Story
• Visual: Track the Story
1. Read the synopsis and compare it to the visual.
2. Build/reinforce essential background knowledge.
Complete assigned parts in the Class-Prep Assignment. Each part is designed to acquaint you with
the laws, cases, people, issues and terminology you will encounter when watching the
corresponding parts in the video.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
3. Request a copy of the video transcript.
The transcript is formatted into three parts to facilitate the study and thoughtful reflection of the
content in each part. The divisions and their titles do not appear in the video.
4. Review key words and phrases as needed before each day’s showing.
Schedule
1. Plan to watch the video in two class sessions. The following stopping points are recommended in
the video transcript at points where the main topic changes.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief (Start – 06:22)
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies (06:23 – 14:18)
Session 1 showing
Part 3: New York Times v. United States (14:19 – End)
Session 2 showing
2. Be sure to complete Part 1 and Part 2 in the Class-Prep Assignment before the first session.
3. Complete Part 3 in the Class-Prep Assignment as homework before the second session.
4. Be prepare to participate in brief review at the beginning of each session.
Page 2 of 10
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Instructions
1. Use the video as your primary source for responses in this guide.
2. Watch the assigned part(s) in the video, then complete the work for the corresponding part(s) in
the guide.
3. Add “behind the scenes” details from the Class-Prep Assignment to fill in gaps or expand an
answer.
Key Understanding
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are both forms of expression protected by the First
Amendment and they are often linked together. Legally, “the speech and press clauses may be analyzed
under an umbrella ‘expression’ standard, with little, if any, hazard of missing significant doctrinal
differences.” Several of the cases covered in the video involve free speech issues.
Learn more from this article: Freedom of Expression: Is There a Difference Between Speech and Press
https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt1bfrag2_user.html
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
(Time: Start - 6:22)
Words and Phrases
abridge
amendment
Articles of Confederation
authority
banned
Bill of Rights
citizenry
Congress
constitution
Constitution
crime
critical
democracy
First Amendment
Framers
freedom of speech
freedom of the press
gag
government
informed
integrity
law
parliament
printing press
prior restraint
protest
Page 3 of 10
protest literature
ratified
revolution
revolutionaries
revolutionary era
revolutionary idea
Revolutionary War
rights
seditious libel
the Crown
the press
the public
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Part 1 Questions
1. What is meant by “the press” in the First Amendment?
2. Define seditious libel.
3. Define prior restraint.
4. Discuss this statement in the video: “Democracy depends on an informed citizenry. In order for
democracy to function effectively and to function with integrity, the public needs to know what is
going on.”
5. Who is not protected by the First Amendment?
Who is protected by the First Amendment?
Part 1 Discussion
1. Provide examples of how experience left its mark on our Constitution.
2. Explain how freedom of speech and freedom of the press worked together to achieve liberty. What
are the benefits and limits of each?
3. Why is it important to know what your government is doing? What are the risks of not knowing?
4. When it comes to free speech and a free press, what restriction was put on the government by the
First Amendment?
Page 4 of 10
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
(Time: 6:22 - 14:19)
Words and Phrases
Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
Sedition Act of 1918
articulate
check the government
case
“clear and present danger” test
contempt
conviction
disrepute
dissent
dissenting opinion
Espionage Act of 1917
Federalist
First Amendment
Democratic Republican
hindsight
Jeffersonian
judicial review
law
majority opinion
“marketplace of ideas”
morale
opinion
political party
prosecuted
socialist
suppress
Supreme Court
Supreme Court decision
the draft
uphold
World War I
People to Know
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Congressman Matthew Lyon
Eugene V. Debs
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
Justice Louis Brandeis
Supreme Court Decisions
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
Schenck v. United States
Abrams v. United States
Part 2 Questions:
The Adams Administration
1. The Adams administration had problems with the restrictions placed on the government by the
words in the First Amendment about free speech and the press. Describe those problems and how
the government “solved” them.
2. Where did the Adams administration get the authority to put people in jail for speaking ill of the
government?
3. What historical event prompted the reinterpretation of the First Amendment by the Adams
administration?
4. Explain how President Adams used the Sedition Act of 1798 as a political tool to punish the
opposition party.
5. In 1798, what judicial checks were in place for challenging the constitutionality of the Sedition Acts?
Explain.
6. What is the significance of Matthew Lyon’s story?
7. How can the Supreme Court step in to “fix federal law” when it is not a lawmaking body and it
doesn’t go through the laws to find the ones that need fixing? Explain.
8. How did the people let Adams know that they did not like him trying to limit free speech and that
they didn’t like the Sedition Act? What role did the press have in helping the people decide?
Page 5 of 10
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
The Wilson Administration -- 100 years later.
1. What laws were passed by this administration and why?
2. How were the laws used?
The Schenck Case
1. Who was Schenck?
2. What did Schenck do?
3. What happened to Schenck?
4. Supreme Court decision:
5. Significance of the case:
The Debs Case
1. Who was Debs?
2. What did Debs do?
3. What happened to Debs?
4. Supreme Court decision:
5. Significance of the case:
6. After hearing about the decisions in Schenck and Debs, what logical conclusion might the public
come to about the position of the Court on dissent under the First Amendment?
7. The Debs and Schenck cases were decided within days of each other. How did the news affect the
people in general and one person in particular?
The Abrams Case
1. Who was Abrams?
2. What did Abrams do?
3. What happened to Abrams?
4. Supreme Court decision?
5. Significance of the case?
6. How was the Abrams case similar to the Debs and Schenck cases?
7. Describe the “pivot” made by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in this case.
8. Explain the significance of dissent by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes and the metaphor he used to
explain his new position.
9. What role to you think the people and the press played in changing the mind of Justice Oliver
Wendell Holmes? Explain.
10. How did Holmes’ dissent impact the law and the trajectory of the Court’s decisions in free speech
cases in the coming years?
Page 6 of 10
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Part 2 Discussion
1. Reflect on the cases of Lyon, Debs, Schenck and Abrams, then identify commonalities on different
points:
Here are four points to start your thinking. Add at least 6 more points, then respond to each.
a. Historical context:
b. Laws involved in the cases:
c. Government’s claim:
d. Nature of the violations:
2. The judicial process was different in which of these cases? Lyon, Debs, Schenck, Abrams.
Explain.
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 14:19 – 25:18)
Words and Phrases
advocate
checks and balances
classified information
clear and present danger standard
dissent
enjoin
evolution in doctrine
expedited
hindsight
imminent harm
First Amendment values
fourth branch of government
treason
leak
majority
manipulate
policy
top secret
undaunted
unprecedented
Documents and Events
Vietnam War
Pentagon Papers
People and Organizations
Daniel Ellsberg
Alexander Haig
Charles Colson
Justice William J. Brennan Jr.
Justice Harry Blackmun
Justice William O. Douglas
President Nixon
Henry Kissinger
New York Times
Washington Post
Marines
Part 3 Questions:
1. Which department was responsible for the Pentagon Papers and what did they contain?
2. Who was Daniel Ellsberg and why did he leak the Pentagon Papers?
3. Which administration was responsible for the Pentagon Papers?
4. Why did Nixon get involved when his Administration was not responsible for the Pentagon Papers?
5. Why did the publication of the Pentagon Papers by the Times and the Post start, stop, and then start
again?
Page 7 of 10
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
6. How was the New York Times case different from the Lyon, Debs, Schenck, Abrams cases?
7. Why do you think the Court acted so quickly to decide this case?
8. Capture screen shots of the headlines in each of the papers announcing the decision of the court,
and the title of a relevant article in the paper.
9. What did the people learn about their government from the publishing of the Pentagon Papers?
Part 3 Discussion
1. Does the ruling in this case give the press unbridled freedom to publish any government document
they receive? Explain.
2. Consider the impact that Daniel Ellsberg, technology, and the media may have had on the decision
by the justices. If all the justices had voted to stop publication, would that have been the end of the
story?
3. What are the roles and responsibilities of the “fourth branch” of government?
4. The public may have the right to know
everything about their government, but should
they? If not, how much should they know and
what should they know? Read what the judge
said about public access to information in his
ruling on the Pentagon Papers case:
“Our democracy depends for its future on the
informed will of the majority, and it is the
purpose and the effect of the First Amendment
to expose to the public the maximum amount of
information on which sound judgment can be
made by the electorate. The equities favor disclosure, not suppression of even a momentary delay.”
From the ruling of U.S. District Court Judge Gerhard Gesell on June 21, 1971, as quoted in
The Washington Post, “Pentagon Papers: Free—At Last” on July 1, 1971.
How is Judge Gesell interpreting the “freedom of the press” clause of the First Amendment? What
meaning of “freedom” is he describing? Unbridled or limited? Explain.
Page 8 of 10
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Review & Respond
Class Activity: Three Minute Reviews
Materials Needed: Paper and pencil
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Divide the class into small groups. Select a recorder for each group.
Provide each group with a different topic, theme, position, issue or question.
Allow 3 minutes for groups to discuss.
Give each group 3 minutes to record their comments in writing.
When time is up, the recorder for each group reads the responses of the class.
Briefly discuss as a class after each group’s report.
Other points may be added by the class and the teacher.
Suggestions for Review and Discussion:
1. Key points in each of these cases:
Abrams v. United States
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
New York Times v. United States
Schenck v. United States
United States v. Matthew Lyon
2. How do the People fit into our checks-and-balances system of government?
3. Why is it important for people know what their government is doing? What kind of information is
important for them to know and why do they need to know it?
4. Identify ways in which the government tries to control information about national security matters.
Legal:
Unethical or illegal:
5. Identify ways in which people learn about national security matters.
Legal:
Unethical or illegal:
6. Trace the evolution of our right to a free press.
7. Discuss the role of technology in achieving and keeping our First Amendment rights to free speech
and the press.
8. Explain the relationship between the people, the press, and the government in a democracy.
Page 9 of 10
Student’s Video Guide
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
9. Agree/Disagree: In a democracy, ignorance about the government is not bliss, it is dangerous.
Explain.
10. It is often said that hindsight is 20/20. What does the idiom mean and how does it apply to the
story?
11. Why does it matter if the government lies or manipulates information in order to influence the
public?
12. Explain how advances in technology make it both harder and easier for people to tell when the
government lies.
13. Reflect on the impact of evolving technology and the power of the media to shape public opinion
and motivate others to action.
14. Discuss the challenges facing the public and the government in a society with a free press and many
different media options.
15. Should leakers and hackers be prosecuted if they obtain and distribute government information?
16. Americans have greater access to information about their government than ever before, but
complacency and ignorance remain pervasive. Discuss possible reasons and consider the
ramifications of not knowing.
Survey Questions
Class Activity: Class Poll
Materials Needed:
Annenberg Survey Questions (Student Materials)
Instructions:
1. Participate in class poll by answering the Annenberg Survey Questions.
2. Compare class results to the results in the national surveys conducted by the Annenberg Public
Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.
3. Provide an interpretive analysis of the data.
Wrap Up Homework
Revisit the video as needed to complete rows 9-11 in each of the 5 case briefs in the Class-Prep
Assignment.
Page 10 of 10
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Synopsis of the Story
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Freedom of speech or the press did not exist in the colonies before the Constitution. British subjects
were under the authority of the king, and the king punished dissenters. The king also controlled the
press and censored content before it was published. After the colonists fought and won independence
from England, the rules were changed when the Constitution was written.
Remembering the king’s actions, the Framers designed a government with three branches and a system
of checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power. They also made the federal government
responsible for protecting individual liberties and accountable to a separate, but all powerful group, the
People.
Jefferson viewed the press as the “only safeguard for public liberty” and an informed citizenry as “the
best army” for the task. Freedom of the press was seen as vital for protecting democracy so the Framers
linked it to speech and included both in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging
freedom of speech, or of the press . . . .”
Experience not only made its mark on the Constitution, but it also it impacted judicial interpretations
that followed. In World War I, the Supreme Court upheld government actions against people in the
interest of national security. Over the next 200 years, the Court would continue to grapple with freedom
of expression issues in wartime. All the while, a watchful press would keep the public informed and
debate alive. In 1971, the Supreme Court reaffirmed freedom of the press even in the midst of a
national crisis by allowing the publication of the Pentagon Papers. It had come full circle in its views.
Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 16 January 1787
“I am persuaded myself that the good sense of the people will always be found to be the best army.
They may be led astray for a moment, but will soon correct themselves. The people are the only
censors of their governors: and even their errors will tend to keep these to the true principles of their
institution. To punish these errors too severely would be to suppress the only safeguard of the public
liberty. The way to prevent these irregular interpositions of the people is to give them full
information of their affairs thro' the channel of the public papers, and to contrive that those papers
should penetrate the whole mass of the people. The basis of our governments being the opinion of
the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide
whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I
should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive
those papers and be capable of reading them.”
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Track the Story Line
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Revolutionary
War
Possible War
with France
World War I
Vietnam War
Abrams
1919
Lyon
1798
Sedition Act, 1798
Marbury
v.
Madison
1803
Debs
1917
Schenck
1917
Espionage Act, 1917
Sedition Act, 1918
New York Times
1971
Prior restraint
Printing Press
c.1440
1791
“Congress shall make no law . . .
abridging the right to freedom
of speech, or of the press . . .”
First Amendment
U.S. Constitution
“The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press,
as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.” – James Madison
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Materials
•
•
USCIS 100 Civics Questions and Answers
(Highlighted questions for the lesson)
Class-Prep Assignment – Behind the Scenes (Key)
•
Keys for Cases in Brief
•
Teacher’s Video Guide and Key
•
Track the Story Line
•
Annenberg Survey Questions and Results
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Prerequisite: Complete the Civics Knowledge Self-Assessment and submit your score.
The Class-Prep Assignment is designed to provide you with essential background knowledge for the
video Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States. It is divided into three parts. Each part
supports a specific section of the video.
Instructions:
1. You may work independently, with a partner, or in a study group.
Should you choose to work with others, please identify them by name below.
2. Complete the work for each of the following parts as assigned before watching the video.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 3: New York v. United States
3. Bring all related work to class to use as a reference during class discussion.
4. Use the resources at the end of each part and those made available by the teacher to complete the
work.
5. Keep a list of other reputable sources used.
Note to Teacher
Make available all resources included in this lesson by the time students start working on the Class-Prep
Assignment.
Bring this assignment and all completed work with you to class.
Page 1 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
In Part 1, you will learn about the experiences, words, aspirations and interactions of people and their
government over time that led to the unabridged rights to freedom of speech and the press in the U.S.
Constitution.
Instructions:
Use the resources at the end of Part I to assist with the questions and activities. Resources that are
included with the lesson are indicated on the list.
Questions:
1. When was the printing press invented and why?
Invented in the 1400s
2. Describe the relationship between British subjects and the King of England during the colonial
period.
All political authority rested with the king. The people had no political power and were subject to
the power of the king. In the colonial period, the colonists referred to the king as a tyrant for abuses
of power they experienced.
3. How did the king handle the press in England and in the colonies?
He took control of the press by requiring printers to be licensed. The king also required official
approval of content and would censor text before publication (prior restraint).
4. During the colonial period, how did the king and the people make use of the press?
King: spread authority more quickly over a wider area, maintain control
The People: inform, facilitate dissent, debate differences, rally support, criticize the government
5. The colonists believed the right to a free press was part of their “heritage as Englishmen.” Explain.
“Greater press freedom had been one result of the seventeenth century struggle between king and
Parliament for supremacy, and the colonists thought the right extended to them through their
charters of settlement. An important commentary on the common law at the time of independence
declared that “the liberty of the press is. . . essential to the nature of a free state. . . [and] consists in
laying no previous restraints upon publications.”
6. Why was the press valuable to the colonists in the revolutionary period?
The press was valuable to the colonists because printed words could reach a much wider audience
than sermons, speeches, or letters, the other main avenues for communication. As long as the
people could read and understand what they read.
7. How did the colonists get the right to a free press?
When the Bill of Rights was ratified and added to the Constitution, the First Amendment included
the right to a free press.
8. Quote the relevant phrase for the right to free speech and the press. Cite the source. Identify the
citation format you followed.
“Congress shall make no law abridging . . . freedom of speech, or of the press . . .”
US Const. amend. I; MLA: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/18/
Restate the quote without using any of the exact words.
Answers will vary
Page 2 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Activity 1: Sequence the Events
Chronology tells the story of the press from regulation to freedom. Sequence the following
experiences, events, and documents, then rewrite them in correct order. Add dates and descriptors
for each item with an asterisk (*).
1____ Invention and use of the printing press* (mid-1400s; ability to inform the masses)
2____ Regulation and censorship of the press in England
3____ Colonization in the U.S. by the British begins* (1607; Jamestown settlement)
4____ Regulation and censorship of the press in the colonies
5____ Revolutionary War* (1775-1783; war for independence)
6____ Declaration of Independence* (July 4, 1776; colonies declared independence)
7____ Articles of Confederation* (1777; first attempt at forming a government)
8____ U.S. Constitution* (1788; defined the responsibilities and limits of the federal government)
9____ Bill of Rights* (1791; amendments that made the government responsible for protecting
specific individual liberties)
10____ First Amendment* (1791; guarantees freedom of the press)
Be prepared to discuss ways in which the people, the press, and their government both
changed and stayed the same over the period of time covered.
Activity 2: Design a Graphic
Freedom of expression includes freedom of speech and the press. Design a graphic, such as a Venn
diagram, that compares and contrasts the two rights.
Speech: More personal, limited reach, auditory, requires audience to remember, communicates to
nonreaders, communicates feelings and emotions
Press: Reaches the masses, print, longevity, requires ability to read and understand
Both speech and press: words, means of communication, requires the recipient to understand,
convey information
Activity 3: In the Founders’ Own Words
Analyze the following quotes to determine what the founders said about the people, the press, the
government, and liberty. Take notes.
•
Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 16 January 1787
“I am persuaded myself that the good sense of the people will always be found to be the best army.
They may be led astray for a moment, but will soon correct themselves. The people are the only
censors of their governors: and even their errors will tend to keep these to the true principles of
their institution. To punish these errors too severely would be to suppress the only safeguard of the
public liberty. The way to prevent these irregular interpositions of the people is to give them full
information of their affairs thro' the channel of the public papers, and to contrive that those papers
Page 3 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
should penetrate the whole mass of the people. The basis of our governments being the opinion of
the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide
whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government,
I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should
receive those papers and be capable of reading them.”
•
Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 10 December 1787
“. . . Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no
government should refuse, or rest on interference.”
•
Thomas Jefferson to Colonel Charles Yancey, Monticello, January 6, 1816
” If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and
never will be. The functionaries of every government have propensities to command at will the
liberty and property of their constituents. There is no safe deposit for these but with the people
themselves; nor can they be safe with them without information. Where the press is free, and every
man able to read, all is safe.” –Thomas Jefferson
•
James Madison: “The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to
publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall
be inviolable.”
Part 1 Resources
•
The Annenberg Guide to the United States Constitution: What It Says, What It Means
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/a-guide-to-the-united-states-constitution
•
First Amendment Overview, Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment
•
Chapter 7: The Right to Freedom of the Press, Our Rights
Focus on the first 4 paragraphs. (Included in Lesson Resources)
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Rights/Chapter_7_Our_R
ights.pdf
•
Our Constitution: Chapter One: Why Was a Constitution Necessary?
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Constitution/Chapter%2
01_Our%20Constitution.pdf
•
Understanding Democracy, A Hip Pocket Guide—John J. Patrick
(Selections included in Lesson Resources)
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/understanding-democracy-a-hip-pocket-guide
Page 4 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Additional Resources Used
Cite other reputable sources used.
Video Vocabulary for Part 1
After working through Part 1, assess your knowledge of the vocabulary words below, including multiple
meanings, as these terms will be used in video.
abridge
amendment
Articles of Confederation
authority
banned
Bill of Rights
citizenry
Congress
constitution
Constitution
crime
critical
democracy
First Amendment
Framers
freedom of speech
freedom of the press
gag
government
informed
integrity
law
parliament
printing press
prior restraint
protest
Page 5 of 13
protest literature
ratified
revolution
revolutionaries
revolutionary era
revolutionary idea
Revolutionary War
rights
seditious libel
the Crown
the press
the public
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
In Part 2, you will learn about judicial decisions that show how interpretations of the rights to free
speech and the press evolved over time.
Page 6 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Activity #1:
Select words from the list at the right to fill in the blanks or answer the
questions. Consult the Part 2 Resources to assist with the activity.
1. A possible war with France led the first Congress to pass the Alien and
Sedition Acts of 1798 and President John Adams to sign them into law.
Thomas Jefferson was the vice president and a leader of the of DemocraticRepublican Party. The president was a member of the Federalist Party.
2. Matthew Lyon was one of the earliest people convicted of seditious libel
under the Sedition Act of 1798 for writing and reading a letter critical of
President Adams and his administration’s policy toward France.
1. The power of judicial review gives the Supreme Court the power to declare
unconstitutional laws written by Congress and signed into law by the
president. In World War I, which laws made dissenting words a crime?
Espionage Act of 1917; Sedition Act of 1918
2. In which cases were individuals convicted for voicing opposition to a war or
government actions? Debs v. United States, Trial of Matthew Lyon
3. In which cases were individuals convicted for the distribution of written
material deemed a threat by the government? Schenck v. United States,
Trial of Matthew Lyon, Abrams v. United States
4. In Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that
the nature of the circumstances ultimately determines if one can claim
protection under the free speech clause of the First Amendment. When
delivering the majority opinion, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes linked
printed words and spoken words and articulated a standard known as the
“clear and present danger” test for determining when the government can
limit individual liberty.
5. Eugene V. Debs was a Socialist leader sentenced to 10 years in federal
prison for giving an anti-war speech that included criticism of the draft.
6. When Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote his dissenting opinion in
Abrams v. United States, he used the metaphor of a marketplace to explain
the value of freedom of speech and the free exchange of ideas.
Page 7 of 13
Vocabulary
People
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Matthew Lyon
Eugene V. Debs
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
Justice Louis Brandeis
Laws and Cases
Sedition Act of 1798
Sedition Act of 1918
Espionage Act of 1917
U.S. Constitution
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
Schenck v. United States
Abrams v. United States
United States v. Matthew Lyon
Legal & Political Terms
“clear and present danger” test
conviction
crime
Democratic-Republican
dissenting opinion
draft
Federalist
First Amendment
freedom of speech
Jeffersonian
judicial review
liberty
majority opinion
“marketplace of ideas”
opposition party
political party
prosecute
seditious libel
Socialist
the press
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Research Activity #2: Dangerous Words?
Through this activity you will learn more about four historic cases in which these people ended up being
convicted under the law and sentenced to prison for using words to oppose the federal government:
• Matthew Lyon
• Eugene V. Debs
• Charles T. Schenck
• Jacob Abrams
Cases for three of the people were appealed and heard by a Supreme Court that upheld the convictions.
One was not. Each case plays an important role in the video you will watch in class.
Instructions:
Reproduce the Case in Brief Chart below, then work with a partner or in a study group to complete 1
chart for each case before coming to class. Only complete rows 1-8 at this time.
Note: There are two categories that do not apply for one case. Write N/A and give a reason.
Note to Teacher: Keys for All Cases in Brief can be found in the Teacher Resources section of this lesson.
Case in Brief Chart
1.
Name of the Case
Which court was the final arbiter
of this case?
Vote
2.
Full Citation for the Opinion
Constitutional Issue
Decision Date
3.
Identify Opposing Parties:
4.
5.
Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time.
b. Provide key information about each of the parties.
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties?
d. Why did the parties end up in court?
e. What claims were made by each side?
Question Before the Court
6.
Ruling by the Court:
7.
Outcome for the Accused:
8.
Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both?
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. How did the decision in this case contribute to the story in the video?
10. Describe a memorable point, principle, or understanding involving this case and provide a supporting
quote. Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
11. Explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
Page 8 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 2 Resources
This collection of resources is provided to assist with completing the activities in Part 2.
•
Civil Liberties in Wartime: Timeline (Included in Lesson Resources)
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/CivilLibertiesinWartime.pdf
An annotated timeline containing the laws and cases covered in this assignment.
•
Chapter 6: The Right to Free Speech, Our Rights (Included in Lesson Resources)
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Rights/Chapter_6_Our_R
ights.pdf
•
Chapter 8: Limits and Latitude, The Pursuit of Justice (Included in Lesson Resources)
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/The%20Pursuit%20of%20Justice/
69_75_Ch_8.pdf
•
The Sedition Act of 1918
PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/capitalism/sources_document1.html
•
Sedition Act Trials: Historical Documents and Background: A Short Narrative
Federal Judicial Center: http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/tu_sedition_narrative.html
•
Schneck v. United States
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us47
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/249/47/
Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charles-T-Schenck
•
Abrams v. United States
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/250us616
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/250/616/case.html
PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/personality/landmark_abrams.html
•
Debs. v. United States
Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us211
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/249/211/
Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eugene-V-Debs
•
United States Reports: Decisions of the United States Supreme Court
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/
(Use the citation to locate the case.)
Page 9 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Research Tips: Supreme Court Cases and Opinions (Lesson Resource only)
Resources for Terminology
•
Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/all
•
Findlaw—Law Dictionary
http://dictionary.lp.findlaw.com/
•
Glossary of Legal Terms: SCOTUSblog
http://www.scotusblog.com/reference/educational-resources/glossary-of-legal-terms/
Additional References and Resources Used
Cite other reputable sources used.
Video Vocabulary for Part 2
After working through Part 2, self-assess your knowledge of the vocabulary words below, including
multiple meanings, as they will be used in this part of the video.
Words and Phrases
hindsight
suppress
articulate
check the government
morale
disrepute
opinion
Laws and Events
World War I
Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
Sedition Act of 1918
Espionage Act of 1917
First Amendment
Constitution
Legal and Government Terms
“marketplace of ideas”
case
“clear and present danger” test
contempt
conviction
Democratic-Republican
dissent
dissenting opinion
Federalist
Jeffersonian
judicial review
law
majority opinion
political party
prosecuted
socialist
Supreme Court
Supreme Court opinion
draft
uphold
Page 10 of 13
People to Know
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Matthew Lyon
Eugene V. Debs
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
Justice Louis Brandeis
Judicial Decisions
Matthew Lyon case
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
Schenck v. United States
Abrams v. United States
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
In Part 3, you will learn about the Supreme Court decision in New York Times v. United States (1971) and
discover how it changed the trajectory of the Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment right to
freedom of the press.
Research Activity:
1. Reproduce, then complete rows 1-8 in the Case in Brief Chart (same chart used in Part 2).
2. Use the resources at the end of Part 3 to assist with this activity.
3. Cite other reputable sources used.
Note to Teacher: Keys for All Cases in Brief can be found in the Teacher Resources section of this lesson.
Case in Brief Chart
Which court was the final arbiter
of this case?
1.
Name of the Case
2.
Full Citation for the Opinion
3.
Identify Opposing Parties:
4.
5.
Background Story (Facts):
f. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time.
g. Provide key information about each of the parties.
h. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties?
i. Why did the parties end up in court?
j. What claims were made by each side?
Question Before the Court
6.
Ruling by the Court:
7.
Outcome for the Accused:
8.
Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both?
Constitutional Issue
Vote
Decision Date
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. How did the decision in this case contribute to the story in the video?
10. Describe a memorable point, principle, or understanding involving this case and provide a supporting
quote. Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
11. Explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
Page 11 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Part 3 Resources:
•
Freedom of the Press: Prior Restraint
First Amendment Center
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/prior-restraint
•
Civil Liberties in Wartime: Timeline
Annenberg Classroom
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/CivilLibertiesinWartime.pdf
An annotated timeline containing the laws and cases covered in this assignment.
•
New York Times v. United States (1971)
Bill of Rights Institute:
http://billofrightsinstitute.org/educate/educator-resources/lessons-plans/landmark-supremecourt-cases-elessons/new-york-times-v-united-states-1971/
•
United States Reports: Electronic copies of the official printed version
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/403/403.US.713.1873.1885.html
•
New York Times Company v. United States
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873
•
New York Times Co. v. United States
403 U.S. 713 (1971)
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403/713/
Resources for Terminology
•
Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/all
•
Findlaw—Law Dictionary
http://dictionary.lp.findlaw.com/
•
Glossary of Legal Terms: SCOTUSblog
http://www.scotusblog.com/reference/educational-resources/glossary-of-legal-terms/
•
Glossary: United States Courts
http://www.uscourts.gov/Common/Glossary.aspx
•
Merriam-Webster Online
http://www.merriam-webster.com/
Page 12 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher Key
Class-Prep Assignment: Behind the Scenes
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Additional Resources Used
List the names and provide links for other reputable sources used.
Video Vocabulary for Part 3
Self-assess your knowledge of the vocabulary words below, including multiple meanings. Be sure you
can identify the people, organizations, documents and events as they all play significant roles in the last
part of the story.
Words and Phrases
advocate
checks and balances
classified information
clear and present danger standard
dissent
enjoin
evolution in doctrine
expedited
hindsight
imminent harm
First Amendment values
fourth branch of government
treason
leak
majority
manipulate
policy
top secret
undaunted
unprecedented
People and Organizations
Daniel Ellsberg
Alexander Haig
Charles Colson
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.
Justice Harry Blackmun
Justice William O. Douglas
President Nixon
Henry Kissinger
New York Times
Washington Post
Marines
Documents and Events
Vietnam War
Pentagon Papers
Page 13 of 13
(rev. 02/16)
Note: Highlighted questions are used in the self-assessment
Check Your Civics Knowledge for the lesson Defenders of
Liberty: The People and the Press and the video Freedom of
the Press: New York Times v. United States.
Civics (History and Government) Questions for the Naturalization Test
The 100 civics (history and government) questions and answers for the naturalization test are listed below. The civics test
is an oral test and the USCIS Officer will ask the applicant up to 10 of the 100 civics questions. An applicant must answer
6 out of 10 questions correctly to pass the civics portion of the naturalization test.
On the naturalization test, some answers may change because of elections or appointments. As you study for the test,
make sure that you know the most current answers to these questions. Answer these questions with the name of the official
who is serving at the time of your eligibility interview with USCIS. The USCIS Officer will not accept an incorrect
answer.
Although USCIS is aware that there may be additional correct answers to the 100 civics questions, applicants are
encouraged to respond to the civics questions using the answers provided below.
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
A: Principles of American Democracy
1. What is the supreme law of the land?
▪ the Constitution
2. What does the Constitution do?
▪ sets up the government
▪ defines the government
▪ protects basic rights of Americans
3. The idea of self-government is in the first three words of the Constitution. What are these words?
▪ We the People
4. What is an amendment?
▪ a change (to the Constitution)
▪ an addition (to the Constitution)
5. What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution?
▪ the Bill of Rights
6.
What is one right or freedom from the First Amendment?*
▪ speech
▪ religion
▪ assembly
▪ press
▪ petition the government
7. How many amendments does the Constitution have?
▪ twenty-seven (27)
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-1-
www.uscis.gov
8.
What did the Declaration of Independence do?
▪ announced our independence (from Great Britain)
▪ declared our independence (from Great Britain)
▪ said that the United States is free (from Great Britain)
9.
What are two rights in the Declaration of Independence?
▪ life
▪ liberty
▪ pursuit of happiness
10. What is freedom of religion?
▪ You can practice any religion, or not practice a religion.
11. What is the economic system in the United States?*
▪ capitalist economy
▪ market economy
12.
What is the “rule of law”?
▪ Everyone must follow the law.
▪ Leaders must obey the law.
▪ Government must obey the law.
▪ No one is above the law.
B: System of Government
13.
Name one branch or part of the government.*
▪ Congress
▪ legislative
▪ President
▪ executive
▪ the courts
▪ judicial
14. What stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful?
▪ checks and balances
▪ separation of powers
15. Who is in charge of the executive branch?
▪ the President
16.
Who makes federal laws?
▪ Congress
▪ Senate and House (of Representatives)
▪ (U.S. or national) legislature
17.What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress?*
▪ the Senate and House (of Representatives)
18. How many U.S. Senators are there?
▪ one hundred (100)
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-2-
www.uscis.gov
19. We elect a U.S. Senator for how many years?
▪ six (6)
20. Who is one of your state’s U.S. Senators now?*
▪ Answers will vary. [District of Columbia residents and residents of U.S. territories should answer that D.C.
(or the territory where the applicant lives) has no U.S. Senators.]
21. The House of Representatives has how many voting members?
▪ four hundred thirty-five (435)
22. We elect a U.S. Representative for how many years?
▪ two (2)
23. Name your U.S. Representative.
▪ Answers will vary. [Residents of territories with nonvoting Delegates or Resident Commissioners may
provide the name of that Delegate or Commissioner. Also acceptable is any statement that the territory has
no (voting) Representatives in Congress.]
24. Who does a U.S. Senator represent?
▪ all people of the state
25.
Why do some states have more Representatives than other states?
▪ (because of) the state’s population
▪ (because) they have more people
▪ (because) some states have more people
26. We elect a President for how many years?
▪ four (4)
27. In what month do we vote for President?*
▪ November
28. What is the name of the President of the United States now?*
▪ Barack Obama
▪ Obama
29.
What is the name of the Vice President of the United States now?
▪ Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
▪ Joe Biden
▪ Biden
30. If the President can no longer serve, who becomes President?
▪ the Vice President
31. If both the President and the Vice President can no longer serve, who becomes President?
▪ the Speaker of the House
32. Who is the Commander in Chief of the military?
▪ the President
33. Who signs bills to become laws?
▪ the President
34. Who vetoes bills?
▪ the President
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-3-
www.uscis.gov
35. What does the President’s Cabinet do?
▪ advises the President
36.
What are two Cabinet-level positions?
▪ Secretary of Agriculture
▪ Secretary of Commerce
▪ Secretary of Defense
▪ Secretary of Education
▪ Secretary of Energy
▪ Secretary of Health and Human Services
▪ Secretary of Homeland Security
▪ Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
▪ Secretary of the Interior
▪ Secretary of Labor
▪ Secretary of State
▪ Secretary of Transportation
▪ Secretary of the Treasury
▪ Secretary of Veterans Affairs
▪ Attorney General
▪ Vice President
37.
What does the judicial branch do?
▪ reviews laws
▪ explains laws
▪ resolves disputes (disagreements)
▪ decides if a law goes against the Constitution
38. What is the highest court in the United States?
▪ the Supreme Court
39. How many justices are on the Supreme Court?
▪ nine (9)
40. Who is the Chief Justice of the United States now?
▪ John Roberts (John G. Roberts, Jr.)
41.Under our Constitution, some powers belong to the federal government. What is one power of the federal
government?
▪ to print money
▪ to declare war
▪ to create an army
▪ to make treaties
42.Under our Constitution, some powers belong to the states. What is one power of the states?
▪ provide schooling and education
▪ provide protection (police)
▪ provide safety (fire departments)
▪ give a driver’s license
▪ approve zoning and land use
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-4-
www.uscis.gov
43. Who is the Governor of your state now?
▪ Answers will vary. [District of Columbia residents should answer that D.C. does not have a Governor.]
44. What is the capital of your state?*
▪ Answers will vary. [District of Columbia residents should answer that D.C. is not a state and does not have a
capital. Residents of U.S. territories should name the capital of the territory.]
45. What are the two major political parties in the United States?*
▪ Democratic and Republican
46. What is the political party of the President now?
▪ Democratic (Party)
47. What is the name of the Speaker of the House of Representatives now?
▪ Paul D. Ryan
▪ (Paul) Ryan
C: Rights and Responsibilities
48.
There are four amendments to the Constitution about who can vote. Describe one of them.
▪ Citizens eighteen (18) and older (can vote).
▪ You don’t have to pay (a poll tax) to vote.
▪ Any citizen can vote. (Women and men can vote.)
▪ A male citizen of any race (can vote).
49. What is one responsibility that is only for United States citizens?*
▪ serve on a jury
▪ vote in a federal election
50. Name one right only for United States citizens.
▪ vote in a federal election
▪ run for federal office
51.
What are two rights of everyone living in the United States?
▪ freedom of expression
▪ freedom of speech
▪ freedom of assembly
▪ freedom to petition the government
▪ freedom of religion
▪ the right to bear arms
52. What do we show loyalty to when we say the Pledge of Allegiance?
▪ the United States
▪ the flag
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-5-
www.uscis.gov
53.
What is one promise you make when you become a United States citizen?
▪ give up loyalty to other countries
▪ defend the Constitution and laws of the United States
▪ obey the laws of the United States
▪ serve in the U.S. military (if needed)
▪ serve (do important work for) the nation (if needed)
▪ be loyal to the United States
54. How old do citizens have to be to vote for President?*
▪ eighteen (18) and older
55.
What are two ways that Americans can participate in their democracy?
▪ vote
▪ join a political party
▪ help with a campaign
▪ join a civic group
▪ join a community group
▪ give an elected official your opinion on an issue
▪ call Senators and Representatives
▪ publicly support or oppose an issue or policy
▪ run for office
▪ write to a newspaper
56. When is the last day you can send in federal income tax forms?*
▪ April 15
57. When must all men register for the Selective Service?
▪ at age eighteen (18)
▪ between eighteen (18) and twenty-six (26)
AMERICAN HISTORY
A: Colonial Period and Independence
58.
What is one reason colonists came to America?
▪ freedom
▪ political liberty
▪ religious freedom
▪ economic opportunity
▪ practice their religion
▪ escape persecution
59. Who lived in America before the Europeans arrived?
▪ American Indians
▪ Native Americans
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-6-
www.uscis.gov
60. What group of people was taken to America and sold as slaves?
▪ Africans
▪ people from Africa
61. Why did the colonists fight the British?
▪ because of high taxes (taxation without representation)
▪ because the British army stayed in their houses (boarding, quartering)
▪ because they didn’t have self-government
62. Who wrote the Declaration of Independence?
▪ (Thomas) Jefferson
63. When was the Declaration of Independence adopted?
▪ July 4, 1776
64.
There were 13 original states. Name three.
▪ New Hampshire
▪ Massachusetts
▪ Rhode Island
▪ Connecticut
▪ New York
▪ New Jersey
▪ Pennsylvania
▪ Delaware
▪ Maryland
▪ Virginia
▪ North Carolina
▪ South Carolina
▪ Georgia
65. What happened at the Constitutional Convention?
▪ The Constitution was written.
▪ The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution.
66. When was the Constitution written?
▪ 1787
67.
The Federalist Papers supported the passage of the U.S. Constitution. Name one of the writers.
▪ (James) Madison
▪ (Alexander) Hamilton
▪ (John) Jay
▪ Publius
68.
What is one thing Benjamin Franklin is famous for?
▪ U.S. diplomat
▪ oldest member of the Constitutional Convention
▪ first Postmaster General of the United States
▪ writer of “Poor Richard’s Almanac”
▪ started the first free libraries
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-7-
www.uscis.gov
69. Who is the “Father of Our Country”?
▪ (George) Washington
70. Who was the first President?*
▪ (George) Washington
B: 1800s
71. What territory did the United States buy from France in 1803?
▪ the Louisiana Territory
▪ Louisiana
72.
Name one war fought by the United States in the 1800s.
▪ War of 1812
▪ Mexican-American War
▪ Civil War
▪ Spanish-American War
73. Name the U.S. war between the North and the South.
▪ the Civil War
▪ the War between the States
74.
Name one problem that led to the Civil War.
▪ slavery
▪ economic reasons
▪ states’ rights
75.
What was one important thing that Abraham Lincoln did?*
▪ freed the slaves (Emancipation Proclamation)
▪ saved (or preserved) the Union
▪ led the United States during the Civil War
76.
What did the Emancipation Proclamation do?
▪ freed the slaves
▪ freed slaves in the Confederacy
▪ freed slaves in the Confederate states
▪ freed slaves in most Southern states
77. What did Susan B. Anthony do?
▪ fought for women’s rights
▪ fought for civil rights
C: Recent American History and Other Important Historical Information
78.
Name one war fought by the United States in the 1900s.*
▪ World War I
▪ World War II
▪ Korean War
▪ Vietnam War
▪ (Persian) Gulf War
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-8-
www.uscis.gov
79. Who was President during World War I?
▪ (Woodrow) Wilson
80. Who was President during the Great Depression and World War II?
▪ (Franklin) Roosevelt
81. Who did the United States fight in World War II?
▪ Japan, Germany, and Italy
82. Before he was President, Eisenhower was a general. What war was he in?
▪ World War II
83. During the Cold War, what was the main concern of the United States?
▪ Communism
84. What movement tried to end racial discrimination?
▪ civil rights (movement)
85. What did Martin Luther King, Jr. do?*
▪ fought for civil rights
▪ worked for equality for all Americans
86. What major event happened on September 11, 2001, in the United States?
▪ Terrorists attacked the United States.
87. Name one American Indian tribe in the United States.
[USCIS Officers will be supplied with a list of federally recognized American Indian tribes.]
▪ Cherokee
▪ Navajo
▪ Sioux
▪ Chippewa
▪ Choctaw
▪ Pueblo
▪ Apache
▪ Iroquois
▪ Creek
▪ Blackfeet
▪ Seminole
▪ Cheyenne
▪ Arawak
▪ Shawnee
▪ Mohegan
▪ Huron
▪ Oneida
▪ Lakota
▪ Crow
▪ Teton
▪ Hopi
▪ Inuit
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-9-
www.uscis.gov
INTEGRATED CIVICS
A: Geography
88. Name one of the two longest rivers in the United States.
▪ Missouri (River)
▪ Mississippi (River)
89. What ocean is on the West Coast of the United States?
▪ Pacific (Ocean)
90. What ocean is on the East Coast of the United States?
▪ Atlantic (Ocean)
91.
Name one U.S. territory.
▪ Puerto Rico
▪ U.S. Virgin Islands
▪ American Samoa
▪ Northern Mariana Islands
▪ Guam
92.
Name one state that borders Canada.
▪ Maine
▪ New Hampshire
▪ Vermont
▪ New York
▪ Pennsylvania
▪ Ohio
▪ Michigan
▪ Minnesota
▪ North Dakota
▪ Montana
▪ Idaho
▪ Washington
▪ Alaska
93.
Name one state that borders Mexico.
▪ California
▪ Arizona
▪ New Mexico
▪ Texas
94. What is the capital of the United States?*
▪ Washington, D.C.
95. Where is the Statue of Liberty?*
▪ New York (Harbor)
▪ Liberty Island
[Also acceptable are New Jersey, near New York City, and on the Hudson (River).]
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-10-
www.uscis.gov
B: Symbols
96. Why does the flag have 13 stripes?
▪ because there were 13 original colonies
▪ because the stripes represent the original colonies
97. Why does the flag have 50 stars?*
▪ because there is one star for each state
▪ because each star represents a state
▪ because there are 50 states
98. What is the name of the national anthem?
▪ The Star-Spangled Banner
C: Holidays
99. When do we celebrate Independence Day?*
▪ July 4
100.Name two national U.S. holidays.
▪ New Year’s Day
▪ Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
▪ Presidents’ Day
▪ Memorial Day
▪ Independence Day
▪ Labor Day
▪ Columbus Day
▪ Veterans Day
▪ Thanksgiving
▪ Christmas
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-11-
www.uscis.gov
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher
Keys for All Cases in Brief
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Case 1: United States v. Matthew Lyon (1798)
Federal Judicial Center: http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/tu_sedition_narrative.html
National Archives Catalog: https://research.archives.gov/id/595619
Tenth Amendment Center: http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/09/matthew-lyon-thesedition-acts-first-victim/
1.
2.
Name of the Case
United States vs. Matthew Lyon
Case in Brief
Which court was the final arbiter
of the case?
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of
Vermont
Constitutional Issue
Free press
Vote:
Jury voted to convict
Full Citation for the Opinion
Decision Date
N/A; case wasn’t heard by the Supreme
1798
Court
3. Identify All Parties:
The State: U.S. government;
Defendant: Matthew Lyon
4. Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time.
A possible war with France; political conflicts between Federalists and Republicans; Federalists
b. Provide key information about the party/parties accused of a crime. Irish-born, Republican member of
Congress, Representative from Vermont
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties? Published letters criticizing the government
and President Adams.
d. Why did the parties end up in court? The government charged Lyon with the crime of sedition under
the Sedition Act of 1798
e. What claims were made by each side? Lyon: Free speech protection; Government: attempted to
undermine the government Sedition Act of 1798
5. Question before the Court: Was Lyon guilty under the Sedition Act of 1798?
6. Decision of the Court: Yes, Lyon was guilty and sentenced to 4 months in prison and a $1,000 fine.
7. Outcome: Lyon went to jail and served his time.
8. Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both? Printed words
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. How did the decision in this case contribute to the story in the video? Lyon was one of the first to be
convicted of speaking ill of the government under the Sedition Act.
10. Describe a memorable point, principle, or understanding from this case and provide a supporting quote.
Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
This case was not heard in the Supreme Court because it occurred before Marbury v. Madison in 1803.
11. Explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
Lyon was a Republican and the president was a Federalist. Adams used the law as a political tool to punish
the opposition party and restrict criticism of his administration. At the time, there was no other court
where Lyon could challenge the law since the Supreme Court didn’t review federal law.
Page 1 of 5
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher
Keys for All Cases in Brief
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Case 2: Schenck v. United States (1919)
United States Reports: https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/249/249.US.47.437.438.html
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us47
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/249/47/
Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charles-T-Schenck
1.
Name of the Case
Schenck v. United States (1919)
2.
Full Citation for the Opinion
Schenck v. United States (1919)
249 U.S. 47 (1919)
3.
Identify All Parties:
Petitioner: Charles Schenck joined by Elizabeth Baer
Respondent: United States
Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time. World War I,
national security concerns
b. Provide key information about the party/parties accused of a crime. At the time, Charles T. Schenck of
Philadelphia was the General Secretary of the Socialist Party of America
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties? Mailed anti-war circulars to draftees that
encouraged them to resist military service.
d. Why did the parties end up in court? Schenck appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court.
e. What claims were made by each side? Schenck: Freedom of speech; Government: Schenck’s actions
violated the Espionage Act of 1917
Question Before the Court: Are Schenck's words protected by the free speech clause of the First
Amendment? (OYEZ)
4.
5.
Which court was the final
arbitrator of this case?
Supreme Court
Constitutional Issue
Freedom of speech
6.
Vote:
9 to 0
Majority Opinion written
by…
Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes
Decision of the Court The free speech clause of the First Amendment does not shield advocacy urging
conduct deemed unlawful under the Espionage Act. (OYEZ)
7. Outcome: His conviction was upheld. He was sentenced to and served 6 months in jail
8. Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both? Printed words only
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. Evaluate the significance of the decision in this case to the story in the video. Answers will vary
10. Describe a memorable point, principle, or understanding from this case and provide a supporting quote.
Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
This case is memorable for the “clear and present danger” test and the example he gave of yelling “fire” in
a crowded theater. “Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom of speech
protected by the First Amendment may become subject to prohibition when of such a nature and used in
such circumstances a to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils
which Congress has a right to prevent. The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which
it is done.” Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, majority opinion.
11. After watching the video, explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
When the country is in the midst of a war, the Court tends to side with the government.
Page 2 of 5
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher
Keys for All Cases in Brief
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Case 3: Debs v. United States (1919)
United States Reports: https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/249/249.US.211.714.html
Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us211
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/249/211/case.html
Findlaw: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/249/211.html
1.
Name of the Case
Debs v. United States (1919)
2.
Full Citation for the Opinion
Decision Date
Debs v. United States
March 10, 1919
249 U.S. 211 (1919)
Identify the Parties:
Petitioner: Eugene V. Debs
Respondent: United States
Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time. World War
I, national security concerns
b. Provide key information about the party/parties accused of a crime. Eugene V. Debs was a prominent
American socialist and labor leader who was headed up the founding of the Socialist Party of America.
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties? Debs gave an anti-war speech in which he
protested U.S. involvement in WWI.
d. Why did the parties end up in court? Debs appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court.
e. What claims were made by each side? Debs: Free speech protection; Government: Debs’ actions
violated the Espionage Act of 1917
Question Before the Court:
Did Debs' conviction under the Espionage Act of 1917 violate his First Amendment right to freedom of
speech? (OYEZ)
Decision of the Court
The Court unanimously agreed that it did not.
Outcome: Debs was convicted and sentenced to 10 years in prison and was disenfranchised for life (lost his
citizenship). President Warren G. Harding pardoned Deb in 1921.
Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both? Spoken words
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Which court was the final
arbitrator of this case?
Supreme Court
Constitutional Issue
Freedom of speech
Vote:
9 to 0
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. Discuss the significance of the majority opinion or dissenting opinion in this case to the story in the video.
Even though the majority ruled to uphold the convictions, in his dissenting opinion, Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes began to see the importance of not putting limits on free speech, even in wartime. He used the
metaphor of a marketplace to describe the value of free speech and the free exchange of ideas.
10. Describe a memorable point, principle, or understanding involving this case and provide a supporting
quote. Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
By its ruling, the Supreme Court was approving the criminalization of dissent.
11. After watching the video, explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
When the country is in the midst of a war, the Court tends to side with the government.
Page 3 of 5
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher
Keys for All Cases in Brief
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Case 4: Abrams v. United States (1919)
United States Reports: https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/250/250.US.616.316.html
Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/250us616
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/250/616/case.html
PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/personality/landmark_abrams.html
1.
2.
Name of the Case
Abrams v. United States
What court was the final arbiter
of this case?
Supreme Court
Constitutional Issue
Free speech protections
Vote
7-2
Full Citation for the Opinion
Decision Date
Abrams v. United States
November 10, 1919
250 U.S. 616 (1919)
3. Identify the Parties:
Petitioner: Jacob Abrams joined by 4 others
Respondent: United States
4. Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time. World War I,
national security concerns; rise of the Communist Party in Russia during the Russian Revolution in 1917
viewed as a threat to America
b. Provide key information about each of the parties. Jacob Abrams and some of his friends were Russian
immigrants, not citizens
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties? Abrams and others threw two anti-war
leaflets from the windows of a building.
d. Why did the parties end up in court? The U.S. government charged Abrams et. al. with crimes under
the Espionage Act of 1917 and Sedition Act of 1918.
e. What claims were made by each side? Abrams: Freedom of speech; Government: Abrams’ actions
violated the Espionage Act of 1917;
5. Question Before the Court:
Do the amendments to the Espionage Act or the application of those amendments in this case violate the
free speech clause of the First Amendment? (OYEZ)
6. Decision of the Court:
No, the Espionage act does not violate the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
7. Outcome:
Conviction was upheld and the defendants were sentenced to 20 years in prison
8. Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both?
Printed words
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
12. Discuss the significance of the case and the judicial decision to the story in the video.
Answers will vary
13. Describe a memorable point, principle, or understanding involving this case and provide a supporting
quote. Identify the writer and indicate if it comes from the majority or dissenting opinion.
Holmes’ pivot in his dissent; He used the metaphor of a marketplace and the free exchange of ideas to
discuss the value of free speech.
14. After watching the video, explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
When the country is in the midst of a war, the Court tends to side with the government.
Page 4 of 5
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher
Keys for All Cases in Brief
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Case 5: New York Times Company. v. United States (1971)
(The case title in the video appears in this format: New York Times v. United States)
Bill of Rights Institute: http://billofrightsinstitute.org/educate/educator-resources/lessonsplans/landmark-supreme-court-cases-elessons/new-york-times-v-united-states-1971/
United States Reports:
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/403/403.US.713.1873.1885.html
OYEZ: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873
Justia: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403/713/
1.
Case in Brief
Name of the Case
Which court was the final arbiter
Vote
New York Times v. United States
of this case? Supreme Court
6-3, in favor of The Times
2. Full Citation for the Opinion
Constitutional Issue
Decision Date
New York Times Company. v. United
First Amendment Freedom of the
June 30, 1971
States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)
press
3. Identify Opposing Parties:
New York Times joined by Washington Post; U.S. government
4. Background Story (Facts):
a. Describe the historical context (e.g., major events, issues, concerns of society) at the time.) US
involvement in Vietnam leading up to the Vietnam War, national security concerns
b. Provide key information about each of the parties.
New York Times is a major newspaper publisher; Nixon administration
c. What decision/action led to the dispute between parties? The Time was planning to publish Illegally
leaked documents about US involvement in Vietnam that contained some “classified” material.
d. Why did the parties end up in court? The government wanted the Court to stop the Times from
publishing the Pentagon Papers.
e. What claims were made by each side? The Times: Freedom of the press; Government: risks to national
security
5. Question Before the Court: Did the Nixon administration's efforts to prevent the publication of what it
termed "classified information" violate the First Amendment? (OYEZ)
6. Decision of the Court:
The Court ruled in favor of the New York Times. Yes, preventing publication violates the First Amendment.
7. Outcome:
All the Pentagon Papers were printed in the newspaper.
8. Was this case about spoken words, printed words, or both? Printed words
Complete the following AFTER watching the video.
9. How did the decision in this case contribute to the story in the video?
It was the first time the Court sided with the public’s right to know during a time of national crisis.
10. Memorable words highlighted in the video from majority and/or dissenting opinions.
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., majority: “the First Amendment commands that no injunction may issue”
Justice William 0. Douglas, majority: “open debate and discussion of public issues are vital to our national
health,” even if “These disclosures may have a serious impact.”
Justice Harry Blackmun, dissent: “the death of soldiers, the destruction of alliances... And the inability of
our diplomats to negotiate.”
11. After watching the video, explain how the case and the decision are a reflection of the times.
Answers will vary
Page 5 of 5
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Synopsis
Freedom of speech or the press did not exist in the colonies before the Constitution. British subjects
were under the authority of the king, and the king punished dissenters. The king also controlled the
press and censored content before it was published. After the colonists fought and won independence
from England, the rules were changed when the Constitution was written.
Remembering the king’s actions, the Framers designed a government with three branches and a system
of checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power. They also made the federal government
responsible for protecting individual liberties and accountable to a separate, but all powerful group, the
People.
Jefferson viewed the press as the “only safeguard for public liberty” and an informed citizenry as “the
best army” for the task. Freedom of the press was seen as vital for protecting democracy so the Framers
linked it to speech and included both in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging
freedom of speech, or of the press . . . .”
Experience not only made its mark on the Constitution, it impacted judicial interpretations that
followed. In World War I, the Supreme Court upheld government actions against people in the interest
of national security. Over the next 200 years the Court would continue to grapple with freedom of
expression issues in wartime. All the while, a watchful press would keep the public informed and debate
alive. In 1971, the Supreme Court reaffirmed freedom of the press even in the midst of a national crisis
by allowing the publication of the Pentagon Papers. It had come full circle in its views.
This video tells the story of how time and experience gave us the fundamental rights of free speech a
free press and how our understanding of those rights evolved over the years.
Speakers on Screen
• Akhil Amar: Yale Law School
• Barbie Zelizer: University of Pennsylvania
• Floyd Abrams: Attorney, Cahill Gordon & Reindel
• Geoffrey R. Stone: University of Chicago Law
School
• Joanne Freeman: Yale University
• Kanji Yoshino: New York University School of Law
• Paula Franzese: Seton Hall University School of
Law
• Stephen Solomon: New York University
• Susan Herman: President, American Civil Liberties
Union
• Ted Olson: Former U.S. Solicitor General
• Vincent Warren: Executive Director, Center for
Constitutional Rights
Speakers on Audio Tape
• Alexander M. Haig, Jr.: White House Chief of Staff
• Charles Colson: Special Council to the President
• Henry Kissinger: Secretary of State
• Richard M. Nixon: President of the United States
Laws and Cases
• Espionage Act of 1917
• Sedition Act of 1798
• Sedition Act of 1918
• U.S. Constitution
• Abrams v. United States
• Debs v. United States
• Marbury v. Madison
• New York Times v. United States
• Schenck v. United States
• United States v. Matthew Lyon
Page 1 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Preparation for Viewing and Study
Carry out steps 1 and 2 several days before watching the video.
Materials Needed:
• Class-Prep Assignment
• Synopsis of the Story
• Visual: Track the Story Line
1. Introduce the story by using the synopsis and the visual.
2. Build/reinforce essential background knowledge.
Students complete assigned parts in the Class-Prep Assignment. Each part is designed to acquaint
students with the laws, cases, people, issues and terminology they will encounter when watching
the corresponding parts in the video.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
3. Ensure that each student has access to a video transcript.
The transcript is formatted into 3 parts to facilitate the study and thoughtful reflection of the
content in each part. The divisions and their titles do not appear in the video.
4. Review key words and phrases as needed before each day’s showing.
Schedule
1. Plan to show the video in two sessions. The following stopping points are recommended in the
video transcript at points were the main topic changes.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief (Start – 06:22)
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies (06:23 – 14:18)
Session 1 showing
Part 3: New York Times v. United States (14:19 – End)
Session 2 showing
2. Factor in the time students will need to complete Part 1 and Part 2 in the Class-Prep Assignment
before the first session.
3. Assign Part 3 in the Class-Prep Assignment as homework before the second session.
4. Begin and end each session with a brief review.
Page 2 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Instructions
1. Use the video as your primary source for responses in this guide.
2. Watch the assigned part(s) in the video then complete the work for the corresponding part(s) in
the guide
3. Add “behind the scenes” details from the Class-Prep Assignment to fill in gaps or expand an
answer.
Key Understanding
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are both forms of expression protected by the First
Amendment and they are often linked together. Legally, “the speech and press clauses may be analyzed
under an umbrella ‘expression’ standard, with little, if any, hazard of missing significant doctrinal
differences.” Several of the cases covered in the video involve free speech issues.
Learn more from this article: Freedom of Expression: Is There a Difference Between Speech and Press
https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt1bfrag2_user.html
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
(Time: Start - 6:22)
Words and Phrases
abridge
amendment
Articles of Confederation
authority
banned
Bill of Rights
citizenry
Congress
constitution
Constitution
crime
critical
Democracy
First Amendment
Framers
freedom of speech
freedom of the press
gag
government
informed
integrity
law
parliament
printing press
prior restraint
protest
protest literature
ratified
revolution
revolutionaries
revolutionary era
revolutionary idea
Revolutionary War
rights
seditious libel
the Crown
the press
the public
Part 1 Questions
1. What is meant by “the press” in the First Amendment?
printing press
2. Define seditious libel. Speaking ill of the government. It is a crime to criticize the government.
Page 3 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
3. Define prior restraint:
“Judicial suppression of material that would be published or broadcast, on the grounds that it is
libelous or harmful. In US law, the First amendment severely limits the ability of the government to
do this.” Per the video
4. Discuss this statement in the video: “Democracy depends on an informed citizenry. In order for
democracy to function effectively and to function with integrity, the public needs to know what is
going on.” Answers will vary.
5. Who is not protected by the First Amendment? The government
Who is protected by the First Amendment? People living under the authority of the Constitution
Part 1 Discussion
1. Provide examples of how experience left its mark on our constitution.
The colonists experienced the tyranny of the king and feared a government with too much power.
Therefore, they developed a government in which the power came from the people.
2. Explain how freedom of speech and freedom of the press worked together to achieve liberty. What
are the benefits and limits of each? Freedom of speech protects us when we talk to each other.
When we give speeches, we put ideas forward and express opinions. The press is an institutional
means for spreading ideas to a large number of people. Ideas of freedom were communicated
through speech and the press that resonated with the colonists and mobilized them to revolt and
seek independence from England.
3. Why is it important to know what your government is doing? What are the risks of not knowing?
A knowledgeable populace helps keep the government honest. If you don’t know what the
government is doing, it can take advantage of you, take rights away, put the country at risk, deviate
from the Constitution, etc.
4. When it comes to free speech and a free press, what restriction was put on the government by the
First Amendment? Congress could make no law that abridged these rights.
Page 4 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
(Time: 6:22 - 14:19)
Words and Phrases
Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
Sedition Act of 1918
articulate
check the government
case
clear and present danger test
contempt
conviction
disrepute
dissent
dissenting opinion
Espionage Act of 1917
Federalist
First Amendment
Democratic Republican
hindsight
Jeffersonian
judicial review
law
majority opinion
“market place of ideas”
morale
opinion
political party
prosecuted
socialist
suppress
Supreme Court
Supreme Court decision
the draft
uphold
World War I
People to Know
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Congressman Matthew Lyon
Eugene V. Debs
Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes
Justice Louis Brandeis
Supreme Court Decisions
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
Schenck v. United States
Abrams v. Untied States
Part 2 Questions:
The Adams Administration
1. The Adams administration had problems with the restrictions placed on the government by the
words in the First Amendment about free speech and the press. Describe those problems and how
the government “solved” them. The problem was a pending war with France and people who would
criticize government policies. Adams and Congress passed a law making it illegal to speak ill of the
government, in spite of what the words said in the First Amendment. The government interpreted
“no” to mean something else.
2. Where did the Adams administration get the authority to put people in jail for speaking ill of the
government? The government had lawmaking authority under the Constitution. Laws were written
and passed by the Congress and signed by the President that criminalized words spoken or written
in dissent or criticism.
3. What historical event prompted the reinterpretation of the First Amendment by the Adams
administration? Possible war with France
4. Explain how President Adams used the Sedition Act of 1798 as a political tool to punish the
opposition party.
President: John Adams; Political Party: Federalist
Vice President: Thomas Jefferson; Political Party: Democratic-Republican
President John Adams, a Federalist, signed the Alien and Sedition Acts into law. He was afraid the
French might topple the young U.S. government – with the help of the Democratic Republicans, led
Page 5 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
by his vice president, Thomas Jefferson. The law made it a federal crime to criticize the President
and Congress, but it wasn’t a federal crime to criticize the Vice President. The Sedition Act protected
only one party and punished the other. Outspoken Republicans were arrested, tried, and convicted
under the Sedition Act.
5. In 1798, what judicial checks were in place for challenging the constitutionality of the Sedition Acts?
Explain. None. The court didn’t understand its role in that way until the decision in Marbury v.
Madison in 1803. At the time, the courts didn’t get involved in trying to fix federal laws. After
Marbury v. Madison the Court had the power of judicial review.
6. What is the significance of Matthew Lyon’s story?
He was one of the first to be charged, convicted and sent to jail under the Sedition Act. He was a
Republican.
7. How can the Supreme Court step in to “fix federal law” when it is not a lawmaking body and it
doesn’t go through the laws to find the ones that need fixing? Explain.
Judicial review gives the Court the power to declare a law made by Congress and signed by the
President unconstitutional. No longer is that law in effect. Congress would then need to write
better law and the President would need to sign it. Overall the body of law is “fixed” and improved
by that process. The Supreme Court relies on others to the challenge the constitutionality of a law
and selects the cases it will hear.
8. How did the people let Adams know they did not like him trying to limit free speech, and they didn’t
like the Sedition Act? They didn’t reelect him.
What role did the press have in helping the people decide?
It all made the news and dissent from the opposition party increased. During the 2 1/2 years that
the Sedition Act was in effect, the number of opposition newspapers doubled
The Wilson Administration -- 100 years later.
1. What laws were passed by this administration and why?
It was World War I and the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918 were passed to
prevent Americans from interfering with the government’s ability to draft people into the military.
2. How were the laws used?
The laws were used in a way that suppressed speech and punished people who were merely
dissenting against government policy and how the war was being conducted.
The Schenck Case
1. Who was Schenck? A socialist leader
2. What did Schenck do? Individuals were handing out leaflets criticizing the draft.
3. What happened to Schenck? He was sent to prison
4. Supreme Court decision: It voted unanimously to up hold Schenck’s conviction
5. Significance of the case: It established a clear and present danger test
Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes introduced a repressive interpretation of the First Amendment right
to free speech. He wrote in his opinion that lowering the morale for the draft was a “clear and
Page 6 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
present danger” to the nation. And that the First Amendment did not protect free speech at all
costs.
The Debs Case
1. Who was Debs?
Debs was a socialist and a nationally known figure. He had been a candidate for president in an
earlier election and received millions of votes.
2. What did Debs do?
He made a speech saying that he thought WWI was a bad war.
3. What happened to Debs?
For this speech he was prosecuted and sentenced to 10 years in prison.
4. Supreme Court decision:
It voted unanimously to uphold Debs’ conviction.
5. Significance of the case: Debs was well known and popular figure. He had been a presidential
candidate in a previous election. His case caught the attention of many across the country and got
people thinking and arguing about first amendment rights in wartime.
6. After hearing about the decisions in Schenck and Debs, what logical conclusion might the public
come to about the position of the Court on dissent under the First Amendment?
The Court would not be held back by the First Amendment in wartime. If there was a perceived
threat it would side with the government. By its decisions, the Court gave its stamp of approval to
the criminalization of dissent.
7. The Debs and Schenck cases were decided within days of each other. How did the news affect the
people in general and one person in particular?
The news about the cases got the people thinking about what freedom of speech and freedom of
the press really meant during wartime.
The Abrams Case
1. Who was Abrams?
Russian immigrant, non-citizen
2. What did Abrams do?
Abrams and others threw two anti-war leaflets from the windows of a building.
3. What happened to Abrams?
They were charged and convicted under the Espionage Act of 1917 and Sedition Act of 1918 and
sent to prison.
4. Supreme Court decision?
Upheld the conviction, Abrams et all went to prison
5. Significance of the case?
Significant for the dissenting opinion written by Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes
6. How was the Abrams case similar to the Debs and Schenck cases?
All were found guilty of expressing antiwar sentiments under the law.
7. Describe the “pivot” made by Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes in this case.
Page 7 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Justice Oliver Wendell Homes argued in his dissent in Abrams that free expression during wartime
shouldn’t be prosecuted, but protected. This is a change of direction from the hard line he took in
Schenck when he devised a way to prosecute free expression by applying his clear and present
danger test.
8. Explain the significance of dissent by Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes and the metaphor he used to
explain his new position.
The pivot marked the beginning of a shift back to the Constitution. It was the first time the Court
articulated the meaning of the of freedom of speech and freedom of the press in this country.
We have to protect people who dissent. There’s a marketplace of ideas out there, even ideas that
challenge basic things in our society, and everybody has to have their opportunity to change the
mind of the nation.
9. What role to you think the people and the press played in changing the mind of Justice Oliver
Wendall Holmes? Explain. Answers will vary.
10. How did Holmes’ dissent impact the law and the trajectory of the Court’s decisions in free speech
cases in the coming years?
The position of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes and the position that Justice Louis Brandeis took in
subsequent cases gradually and eventually becomes law. Over the next 50 years, the Court moved
away from government suppressing free speech back to the idea that free speech is a vital way to
check the government.
Part 2 Discussion
1. Reflect on the cases of Lyon, Debs, Schenck, and Abrams then identify commonalities on different
points:
Here are four points to start your thinking. Add at least 6 more points then respond to each.
a. Historical context: Wartime
b. Laws involved in the cases: Sedition Acts; First Amendment
c. Government’s claim: the Sedition Act was violated
d. Nature of the violations: use of words that criticized the government
2. The judicial process was different in which of these cases? Lyon, Debs, Schenck, Abrams
Explain.
Lyon was different because it was not appealed to and decided by the Supreme Court. It was a jury
trial. Lyon’s case was one of the first to be decided under the Sedition Act of 1798. The Supreme
Court didn’t start reviewing federal laws until after Marbury v. Madison in 1803.
Page 8 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 14:19 – 25:18)
Words and Phrases
advocate
checks and balances
classified information
clear and present danger standard
dissent
enjoin
evolution in doctrine
expedited
hindsight
imminent harm
First Amendment values
fourth branch of government
treason
leak
majority
manipulate
policy
top secret
undaunted
unprecedented
Documents and Events
Vietnam War
Pentagon Papers
People and Organizations
Danielle Ellsberg
Alexander Haig
Charles Colson
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.
Justice Harry Blackmun
Justice William O. Douglas
President Nixon
Henry Kissinger
New York Times
Washington Post
Marines
Part 3 Questions:
1. Which department was responsible for the Pentagon Papers and what did they contain?
Department of Defense; they would tell the story of how decisions about were made about the war
in Vietnam and who made them. It was a history of all that the U.S. had done right, and all that the
U.S. had done wrong, with the benefit of hindsight.
2. Who was Daniel Ellsberg and why did he leak the Pentagon Papers?
Ellsberg worked in the Department of Defense and was a strong advocate of the Vietnam War. He
helped develop the papers, and in the process he encountered information he believed would show
that the government had lied to the people about why it went to war in Vietnam, and that its
policies were covering up the fact that the U.S. was losing the war.
3. Which administration was responsible for the Pentagon Papers?
Lyndon Johnson administration.
Why did Nixon get involved when his Administration was not responsible for the Pentagon Papers?
The documents contained classified information that he felt would be injurious to the government.
4. Why did the publication of the Pentagon Papers by the Times and the Post start, stop, and then start
up again?
When Daniel Ellsberg sent copies of the papers to the Times, they started printing articles. After
three days of printing, the government got temporary restraining orders that enjoined (stopped) the
Times from publishing any more installments. It didn’t start printing again until after the Supreme
Court ruling that allowed printing to continue.
5. How was the New York Times case different from the Lyon, Debs, Schenck, Abrams cases?
Page 9 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
In Lyon, Debs, Schenck, Abrams, the government charged individuals with violating the law for
disseminating information via speech or in print that in their view put national security at risk.
These were criminal cases, and criminal cases require penalties and punishments for those
convicted.
In the New York Times case, the government wanted to stop the mass publication of any more
government documents before they had a chance to exercise prior restraint and censor classified
materials. This was not a criminal case. It was a civil case. The government wanted the court to
interfere and stop publication of the documents, but the court decided to uphold freedom of the
press and not interfere with publication of the uncensored Pentagon Papers.
6. Why do you think the Court acted so quickly to decide this case? Answers will vary.
7. Capture screen shots of the headlines in each of the papers announcing the decision of the court,
and the title of a relevant article in the paper.
Newspaper: Washington Post
Headlines: Court Rules for Newspapers, 6-3, Thursday July 1, 1971
Article: Pentagon Papers—Free at Last
Newspaper: The New York Times
Headline: Supreme Court, 6-3, Upholds Newspapers on Publication of the Pentagon Report; Times
Resumes Its Series, Halted 15 Days
Article: Pentagon Papers: Study Reports Kennedy made ‘Gamble’ Into a ‘Broad Commitment’
8. What did the people learn about their government from the publishing of the Pentagon Papers?
The Pentagon Papers revealed that the American people had been lied to in a variety of very
significant ways that had manipulated them into being more sympathetic to our role in Vietnam
than they might have been had they known the truth.
Part 3 Discussion
1. Does the ruling in this case give the press unbridled freedom to publish any government document
they receive? Explain.
No, there are still restrictions. The majority told the government that even in wartime, it could not
stop the press from publishing unless it really jeopardized lives or the nation’s security. The
government cannot stop them for a moment, unless the government can prove that the publication
of the information will create a clear and present danger of grave harm to the nation.
2. Consider the impact that Daniel Ellsberg, technology, and the media may have had on the decision
by the Justices. If all the Justices had voted to stop publication, would that have been the end of the
story? Only 2 papers were named in this case. They could be stopped from publishing, but that
would not have been the end of the story. Another media outlet could go ahead with it.
3. What are the roles and responsibilities of the “fourth branch” of government? The fourth branch is
the people. Under the Constitution, the people are ultimately responsible for keeping the
government in check.
Page 10 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
4. The public may have the right to know
everything about their government, but should
they? If not, how much should they know and
what should they know? Read what the Judge
said about public access to information in his
ruling on the Pentagon Papers case:
“Our democracy depends for its future on the
informed will of the majority, and it is the
purpose and the effect of the First Amendment
to expose to the public the maximum amount of
information on which sound judgment can be
made by the electorate. The equities favor disclosure, not suppression of even a momentary delay.”
From the ruling of U.S. District Court Judge Gerhard Gesell on June 21, 1971 as quoted in
The Washington Post, “Pentagon Papers: Free—At Last” on July 1, 1971.
How is Judge Gesell interpreting the “freedom of the press” clause of the First Amendment? What
meaning of “freedom” is he describing? unbridled or limited? Explain.
Review & Respond
Class Activity: Three Minute Reviews
Materials Needed: Paper and pencil
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Divide the class into small groups. Select a recorder for each group.
Provide each group with a different topic, theme, position, issue or question.
Allow 3 minutes for groups to discuss.
Give each group 3 minutes to record their comments in writing.
When time is up, the recorder for each group reads the responses of the class.
Briefly discuss as a class after each group’s report.
Other points may be added by the class and the teacher.
Suggestions for Review and Discussion:
1. Key points in each of these cases:
Abrams v. United States
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
New York Times v. United States
Schenck v. United States
United States v. Matthew Lyon
Page 11 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
2. How do the People fit into our check and balance system of government?
3. Why is it important for people know what their government is doing? What kind of information is
important for them to know and why do they need to know it?
4. Identify ways in which the government tries to control information about national security matters.
Legal:
Unethical or illegal:
5. Identify ways in which people learn about national security matters.
Legal:
Unethical or illegal:
6. Trace the evolution of our right to a free press.
7. Discuss the role of technology in achieving and keeping our First Amendment rights to free speech
and the press.
8. Explain the relationship between the people, the press, and the government in a democracy.
9. Agree/Disagree: In a democracy, ignorance about the government is not bliss, it is dangerous.
Explain.
10. It is often said that hindsight is 20/20. What does the idiom mean and how does it apply to the
story?
11. Why does it matter if the government lies or manipulates information in order to influence the
public.
12. Explain how advances in technology make it both harder and easier for people to tell when the
government lies.
13. Reflect on the impact of evolving technology and the power of the media to shape public opinion
and motivate others to action.
14. Discuss the challenges facing the public and the government in a society with a free press and many
different media options.
15. Should leakers and hackers be prosecuted if they obtain and distribute government information?
16. Americans have greater access to information about their government than ever before, but
complacency and ignorance remains pervasive. Discuss possible reasons and consider the
ramifications of not knowing.
Page 12 of 13
Teacher’s Video Guide & Key
Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Time: 25 minutes)
Survey Questions
Class Activity: Class Poll
Materials Needed
• Annenberg Survey Questions (Student Materials)
• Annenberg Survey Questions and Results (Teacher Materials)
Instructions:
1. Distribute the questions then poll the class and record the results.
2. Compare class results to the results in the national surveys conducted by the Annenberg Public
Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania and develop an interpretive analysis.
Wrap UP Homework
Students revisit the video as needed to complete rows 9-11 in each of the 5 case briefs in the class-prep
assignment.
Page 13 of 13
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Teacher
Track the Story Line
Video: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
Revolutionary
War
Possible War
with France
World War I
Vietnam War
Abrams
1919
Lyon
1798
Sedition Act, 1798
Marbury
v.
Madison
1803
Debs
1917
Schenck
1917
Espionage Act, 1917
Sedition Act, 1918
New York Times
1971
Prior restraint
Printing Press
c.1440
Part 1: Civics History in Brief
1791
“Congress shall make no law . . .
abridging the right to freedom
of speech, or of the press . . .”
First Amendment
U.S. Constitution
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
“The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press,
as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.” – James Madison
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Class Activity
Annenberg Survey Questions
Instructions:
1. Participate in a class poll by answering the following questions. These questions were asked on
Annenberg surveys conducted nationally in 2015 and 2015.
1. Do you favor or oppose the U.S. Congress forbidding the news media from reporting on any
issue of national security without first getting government approval?
Favor
Strongly
Somewhat
Oppose
Somewhat
Strongly
No Opinion
Refuse (REF)
Don’t Know (DK)
2. The government SHOULD be able to stop the press from publishing articles that are critical of
the government.
Favor
Oppose
No Opinion
Strongly
Somewhat
Refuse (REF)
Somewhat
Strongly
Don’t Know (DK)
2. Compare the class results to results from the Annenberg surveys. Develop an interpretive analysis
of the results.
•
2014 Survey:
o News Release: September 17, 2014
http://cdn.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Civics-survey-pressrelease-09-17-2014-for-PR-Newswire.pdf
o Survey Report:
http://cdn.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Civics-surveyappendix-09-17-141.pdf
•
2015 Survey:
o News Release: September 16, 2015
http://cdn.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Civic-knowledgesurvey-Sept.-2015.pdf
o Survey Report:
http://cdn.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/wpcontent/uploads/Civics_Survey_2015_Trends.pdf
Page 1 of 1
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Readings & Resources
•
•
•
•
Video Transcript: Freedom of the Press: New York Times v. United States
(Formatted for study)
Chapter 6: “The Right to Freedom of Speech” from Our Rights by David J.
Bodenhamer
Chapter 7: “The Right to Freedom of the Press” from Our Rights by David
J. Bodenhamer
Chapter 8: “The Latitude and Limits of Free Speech” from The Pursuit of
Justice by Kermit L. Hall and John Patrick
•
Civil Liberties in Wartime: Timeline
•
Understanding Democracy: Select Terms
•
USCIS 100 Civics Questions and Answers
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
The organization of this transcript is formatted to facilitate study and thoughtful reflection of the
content presented in each part. The divisions and their titles do not appear in the video. Questions and
activities related to each part are found in the Video Guide that accompanies this lesson.
Part 1: Civic History in Brief
Time: Start – 6:22
00:26 Narrator: Before we begin, there’s something I want to tell you about the First Amendment. It
wasn’t really the first.
00:34 Akhil Amar: The first Congress actually didn’t list freedom of speech and of the press first. It
actually listed it third on the list. But the first two amendments didn’t get ratified by the states.
It’s a happy coincidence because speech and press are really, in some deep sense, perhaps the
most important freedoms.
00:54 Narrator: It’s really hard to write a constitution. Our own Constitution wasn’t the framers’ first
attempt. Remember the Articles of Confederation? After the Constitution was ratified in 1789,
the framers added 10 amendments in the first two years, and even then, they weren’t sure they
had it right.
01:11 Joanne Freeman: When you read letters from the time period, they’ll say things like, well if the
government’s still here in five years, here’s what I think we should do.
01:18 Narrator: Experience leaves its mark on a constitution. So when you look at the First
Amendment’s freedom of speech and freedom of the press...
01:25 Geoffrey Stone: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press.”
01:29 Narrator: It looks cut and dried: “No law” means no law, right? Well, not quite. As it turns out,
our idea of free speech and a free press has changed a lot over the years. This is the story of
how time and experience turned these fundamental rights into what they are today – and what
the framers only imagined they could be.
01:50 Akhil Amar: Today, they’re absolutely bedrock. Everyone believes in free speech and free press,
but it wasn’t always so.
02:00 Narrator: OK, so imagine what life here was like before the Constitution. No “We the people,”
no right to free speech, much less a free press. Why? Because the people didn’t rule the
colonies.
02:12 Geoffrey Stone: The king ruled. And what the people thought was not of interest to the king.
02:19 Ted Olson: The colonists felt very strongly that one of the freedoms that was denied to them by
the king was the ability to speak out. They wanted the freedom to be able to speak out and
object to their government. They wanted to be able to protest. They wanted to be able to
communicate with one another.
Page 1 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
02:38 Susan Herman: During the revolutionary era, they clearly had a lot to say, and they had a lot to
say that the king would not have liked.
02:44 Narrator: And as the Revolutionary War began, a free press – this thing, churning out sheets of
paper filled with ideas. Ideas can be powerful, and they were just as dangerous to the king as
any gun.
02:56 Susan Herman: The Crown was really trying to stop them from expressing revolutionary ideas
and talking to each other and assembling and getting their revolution going.
03:05 Stephen Solomon: All the protest literature was against the law.
03:09 Narrator: The king had a couple of ways of shutting down the press. He could shut down presses
before they printed ideas. This is known as “prior restraint.”
03:18 Barbie Zelizer: A prior restraint is kind of, you know, putting a gag on somebody before they
ever talk.
03:23 Geoffrey Stone: So anyone who wanted to use a printing press, basically, had to bring their
newspaper, their book, their pamphlet to a government licensor, who would read through it,
excise anything in there that they thought was inappropriate, which meant critical of the
government in any way.
03:36 Narrator: This had been banned in England in the 17th century. But when the king’s rule was
threatened by war, the British government used prior restraint to try to quiet the revolutionary
press. And if he couldn’t shut them down before they spoke, the king could prosecute
revolutionaries after they said anything critical of the government. This has a technical name
you’ll want to remember: “seditious libel.”
03:58 Paula Franzese: Seditious libel is defined as speaking ill of the government.
04:05 Stephen Solomon: It’s a crime to criticize the government. All power was in the king and
Parliament. And they couldn’t be questioned.
04:14 Narrator: But the king lost the war. And when the framers wrote the Bill of Rights, they
remembered how important the press had been to winning their freedom.
04:22 Susan Herman: They were accustomed to the idea that criticizing the government is a good
thing to do. That became part of their idea of what it means to be in a democracy.
04:32 Geoffrey Stone: In a democracy, where the idea is that the people would have the authority to
select their leaders, then it was important for the people to actually know what the government
was doing.
Page 2 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
04:40 Barbie Zelizer: Democracy depends on an informed citizenry. In order for democracy to function
effectively and to function with integrity, the public needs to know what’s going on.
04:53 Narrator: So the First Amendment says the government can’t stop us from expressing ourselves.
04:59 Kenji Yoshino: The First Amendment carries these core principles that are all necessary in
order for people to find their voice in a democracy.
05:07 Narrator: It includes both freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
05:12 Stephen Solomon: The freedom of speech protects us when we talk to each other, when we
give speeches, and we put ideas forward. The press is an institutional means for spreading those
ideas to a large number of people. So the freedom of speech and press work together.
05:28 Geoffrey Stone: Individual speakers could all, of course, give speeches and hand out leaflets and
so on. But they saw the press as a more important player, in an institutional sense, in American
democracy, and in a better position to keep the government honest. Because the press had the
capacity to use resources to learn information and to convey information in a broader way than
an individual speaker could.
05:52 Narrator: And the First Amendment protects both speech and the press from the government.
05:57 Vincent Warren: It says that the government can’t tell you to shut up because it doesn’t like
what you’re saying.
06:03 Narrator: So the First Amendment was ratified, and we’ve had total freedom of the press ever
since, and this is the shortest civics film you’ve ever had to watch.
Um, no. In fact, the men who wrote and then ratified freedom of speech and freedom of the
press were the very first ones to try to undo them.
Part 2: Laws, Cases, and Controversies
Time: 6:23 – 14:18
06:23 Joanne Freeman: When the government goes into motion in the 1790s, there’s still a lot of
debate about exactly what the Constitution means and exactly how far this new government
can go. So they’re arguing as to what the Constitution means and these are the people who
wrote it.
06:37 Narrator: After George Washington left office, some of the framers tried to limit free speech
and the press because they were afraid of war.
06:44 Paula Franzese: The Alien and Sedition Act was signed into law by President Adams in 1798.
He is the leader of essentially a house divided.
Page 3 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
06:57 Narrator: France was growing in power, and as it threatened Europe and the U.S., fear of war
increased tension between the two new political parties at home. President John Adams, a
Federalist, signed the Alien and Sedition Acts into law. He was afraid the French might topple
the young U.S. government – with the help of the Democratic Republicans, led by his vice
president, Thomas Jefferson.
07:19 Akhil Amar: The Sedition Act basically made it a federal crime to criticize the president. The act
made it a federal crime to criticize Congress. Now interestingly, it wasn’t a federal crime to
criticize the vice president, who was the head of the other political party.
07:36 Narrator: Remember, back in those days, the president and vice president were the top two
vote-getters in each election, so they were rivals, not from the same party. The Sedition Act
protected only one party and punished the other.
07:49 Stephen Solomon: And the Adams administration felt that the Jeffersonians favored the
French. And they called them disloyal.
07:58 Geoffrey Stone: The way the act was used was exclusively to prosecute Republican critics of the
Adams administration.
08:05 Narrator: Like Congressman Matthew Lyon, who spent four months in prison for criticizing the
president.
08:11 Akhil Amar: This is ridiculous. This is a gross violation of the First Amendment idea, of the free
speech idea.
08:18 Geoffrey Stone: You can’t have a law that makes it a crime to bring the government or the
president or the Congress into contempt or disrepute. That’s what the First Amendment’s
about.
08:25 Narrator: So, you might want to ask about now, where were the courts? Why didn’t they set
things straight? Well, at this point in American history, the courts had yet to overturn a federal
law. In fact, the entire concept of courts stepping in to fix federal laws, what we call “judicial
review,” wasn’t established in the Supreme Court until Marbury v. Madison. So Congressman
Lyon and the others in prison were out of luck. But, a funny thing happened with the press and
the Sedition Act.
08:55 Stephen Solomon: The funny thing that happened is that it didn’t quell dissent. In fact, dissent
from the opposition party increased. During the 2 1/2 years that the Sedition Act was in effect,
the number of opposition newspapers doubled
09:13 Narrator: Voters threw John Adams out of office in the bitter election of 1800, largely because
they disliked his interpretation of the First Amendment. So it was a long time before another
president thought that limiting free speech was a good idea. Jump ahead over 100 years to
World War I and President Woodrow Wilson. This time, the president and Congress passed the
Page 4 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, saying Americans can’t interfere with the
government’s ability to draft people into the military. But their effect was greater than that.
09:49 Stephen Solomon: The laws were used in a way that suppressed speech and punished people
who were merely dissenting against government policy. How the war was being conducted.
10:00 Narrator: Thousands of people were arrested and put in prison for hampering the draft by
speaking against it. The most famous was Eugene V. Debs. Debs, a Socialist, had been a
candidate for president in a previous election.
10:13 Geoffrey Stone: He was a nationally known figure.
10:15 Akhil Amar: A man who gets a million votes, a million votes running for president, gets up and
makes a speech saying that he thinks World War I is a bad war. And he is prosecuted under the
Sedition Act and he’s imprisoned.
10:29 Narrator: Debs was sentenced to 10 years in prison for giving a speech. The courts sent people
to prison for speech considered dangerous because it might cause a bad reaction. By this time,
there was judicial review, so the Supreme Court heard cases challenging these laws. And in each
case, the Court sided with the government.
10:49 Geoffrey Stone: In the first of those cases, a case called Schenck v. United States, the Supreme
Court, in an opinion by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, unanimously upheld the conviction of
individuals who had handed out a bunch of leaflets criticizing the draft.
11:03 Stephen Solomon: The Supreme Court embarked on a very repressive interpretation of the First
Amendment. It was Justice Holmes’ clear and present danger test.
11:11 Narrator: Justice Holmes argued that lowering morale for the draft presented a clear and
present danger to the nation and that the First Amendment did not protect free speech at all
costs. “No law” didn’t always mean “no law.”
Justice Holmes said suppose someone yells fire in a crowded theater when he knows there’s no
fire and people are trampled running to the exits.
11:34 Geoffrey Stone: Are you really saying he can’t be punished for this? Holmes says of course not.
So the First Amendment obviously can’t mean what it superficially appears to say.
11:42 Narrator: Only a week later, the Court ruled against Eugene Debs.
11:47 Akhil Amar: The Supreme Court unanimously upholds his conviction.
11:50 Geoffrey Stone: Another opinion by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that was in the front page of
every paper in the United States.
Page 5 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
11:55 Paula Franzese: The Schenck case, the Debs case, ultimately had the U.S. Supreme Court giving
its stamp of approval upon the criminalization of dissent.
12:06 Geoffrey Stone: But then something amazing happened.
12:08 Narrator: The Debs decision got a lot of people thinking about what freedom of speech and
freedom of the press really meant during wartime. Among them was Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes. And that fall, he argued in a famous dissent that actually, free expression during
wartime shouldn’t be prosecuted, but protected.
12:27 Geoffrey Stone: And so you get this extraordinary moment of pivoting in which Holmes
suddenly wakes up. And for the first time, we have this strong, eloquent statement by Holmes
that basically begins, for the first time, to articulate the meaning of freedom of speech and
freedom of the press in this country.
12:44 Narrator: Joined by Justice Louis Brandeis, they influenced court rulings on the First Amendment
for the rest of the century.
12:51 Stephen Solomon: We have to protect people who dissent. There’s a marketplace of ideas out
there, even ideas that challenge basic things in our society, and everybody has to have their
opportunity to change the mind of the nation.
13:07 Geoffrey Stone: The position of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes and the position that Justice
Louis Brandeis took in subsequent cases gradually and eventually becomes law.
13:17 Narrator: Over the next 50 years, the Court moved away from government suppressing free
speech back to the idea that free speech is a vital way to check the government.
13:26 Stephen Solomon: What you see are the justices going back in time to a fundamental
recognition that the founding generation kind of had the right idea that dissent, the protests,
was something that enabled us to break away and start our own nation.
13:46 Geoffrey Stone: The Court has come full circle. They learn it with hindsight; they looked back at
what happened in World War I. That was crazy. In the same way that after 1800, people looked
back on the Sedition Act of 1798 and said: What were we doing? This was not necessary. We
completely allowed ourselves to exaggerate the danger and to restrict fundamental freedoms in
a democracy because we were not acting calmly and carefully.
Part 3: New York Times v. United States
Time: 14:19- to End
14:19 Narrator: So on a summer Sunday in June 1971, when Daniel Ellsberg bought a stack of copies of
the New York Times, the front page made him very happy. No, not the story about President
Nixon’s daughter getting married. This one, to the right.
Page 6 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
14:36 Paula Franzese: There had been a leak, and a top-secret U.S. government document was now
being trumpeted as a headline on the front page of the New York Times.
14:47 Narrator: Daniel Ellsberg was the leak. In fact, more like a flash flood. Ellsberg had given the
New York Times a 7,000-page report that became known as the Pentagon Papers.
14:59 Geoffrey Stone: The Pentagon Papers was a multivolume work by individuals in the Department
of Defense that would tell the story of how decisions were made, who made them to navigate
the war in Vietnam.
15:11 Paula Franzese: A history of all that the U.S. had done right, and all that the U.S. had done
wrong, with the benefit of hindsight.
15:20 Geoffrey Stone: And Daniel Ellsberg, who was someone who worked in the Department of
Defense and who was a strong advocate of the Vietnam War, came around to a different point
of view.
15:32 Floyd Abrams: Daniel Ellsberg had been in the Marines for a while. He had served in Vietnam.
He had been in favor of the war.
15:40 Narrator: Ellsberg was involved with creating the report. And the more he learned, the more
Ellsberg believed that the government had lied about why it went to war in Vietnam, and that its
policies were covering up the fact that the U.S. was losing the war.
15:55 Paula Franzese: That report revealed some of the sins of the policy.
15:59 Geoffrey Stone: The Pentagon Papers revealed that the American people had been lied to in a
variety of very significant ways that had manipulated them into being more sympathetic to our
role in Vietnam than they might have been had they known the truth.
16:14 Narrator: Daniel Ellsberg wanted the American people to have this information so they could
know what their government was doing. But the report was classified “top secret.”
16:23 Floyd Abrams: The way the classification system works, the highest level of classification of a
document, the most secret document, is the one which determines how the whole document
would be labeled.
16:39 Narrator: So all 7,000 pages of the Pentagon Papers were classified “top secret,” even though it
wasn’t information that endangered troops. But some of it was deeply embarrassing to the
government and our allies. Daniel Ellsberg secretly photocopied every page. First, he tried to get
members of Congress to make the report available to the public.
17:02 Geoffrey Stone: And they basically say: Classified information is classified. We see no reason to
regard anything you’ve told us as justifying violating the rules against publishing and disclosing
classified information.
Page 7 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
17:18 Floyd Abrams: When they did not do that, he went to the press.
17:23 Geoffrey Stone: He turned them over to the New York Times and basically said now you know
the truth. Make it public.
17:32 Narrator: And after months of poring over each photocopied page, that’s exactly what the New
York Times did. Right there on its front page: secrets revealing that the government had not told
the truth to the American people about the war in Vietnam. And it was only the first article. The
Times announced it would publish an entire series of articles about the Pentagon Papers.
17:56 June 13, 1971, telephone conversation with Henry Kissinger
President Nixon: Hello.
Operator: Mr. President, I have Dr. Kissinger calling you.
President Nixon: OK.
Operator: Thank you.
Narrator: At first, President Richard M. Nixon was slow to respond.
President Nixon: Hello.
Henry Kissinger: Mr. President.
Narrator: The Pentagon Papers covered the four administrations before President Nixon, so
they didn’t reveal secrets specifically about his administration. Still ...
President Nixon: This is treasonable action.
Henry Kissinger: Exactly, Mr. President.
President Nixon: Doesn’t it involve secure information, a lot of other things?
Henry Kissinger: It has the highest classification.
President Nixon: Yeah. What do we do about it?
18:28 Narrator: Over the first 48 hours, different aides told the president the Times was wrong to
publish top-secret information.
June 13, 1971, telephone conversation with Alexander Haig
Alexander Haig: This New York Times expose of the most highly classified documents of the war.
This is a devastating security breach of the greatest magnitude of anything I’ve ever seen.
Page 8 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
18:52 June 15, 1971, telephone conversation with Charles Colson
Charles Colson: Well, you simply cannot allow a newspaper to publish classified documents.
President Nixon: They justify this.
18:56 Narrator: And President Nixon ultimately agreed.
18:59 Geoffrey Stone: The position of the Nixon administration was that they were betraying the
freedom of the press.
19:03 June 15, 1971, telephone conversation with Charles Colson
President Nixon: And freedom of the press does not, is not the freedom to destroy the integrity
of the government.
19:09 Narrator: After only three days of articles, the Nixon administration convinced the courts to stop
the Times from publishing any more installments.
19:17 Stephen Solomon: What Richard Nixon’s administration did was historically unprecedented.
They went into federal court asking federal judges to issue an order stopping publication of the
Pentagon Papers.
19:31 Paula Franzese: The New York Times was enjoined, it was stopped from reporting the rest of the
story. Ellsberg was undaunted. He ultimately succeeded in getting the Washington Post to
publish the story.
19:48 Narrator: And the courts stopped the Post from publishing. But Daniel Ellsberg didn’t stop, and
neither did the press. Across the country, newspapers began publishing what the Times and the
Post couldn’t, as the Times and the Post headed to the Supreme Court. The Court heard and
decided the case in only four days.
20:06 Geoffrey Stone: The most rapidly expedited case in American history.
20:10 Narrator: On June 30th, 1971, the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not prevent
newspapers from publishing the Pentagon Papers. They didn’t have time to write together, so
each justice wrote his own opinion, breaking down into a 6 to 3 majority. The majority told the
government that even in wartime, it could not stop the press from publishing unless it really
jeopardized lives or the nation’s security.
20:36 Geoffrey Stone: And amazingly, what the Supreme Court holds is that the government cannot
stop them for a moment, unless the government can prove that the publication of the
information will create a clear and present danger of grave harm to the nation.
Page 9 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
20:54 Narrator: Justice William 0. Douglas wrote that “open debate and discussion of public issues are
vital to our national health,” even if revealing secrets “may have a serious impact.”
21:04 Stephen Solomon: It was really the first time that the Supreme Court came out explicitly during
a time of national crisis and said that we have to draw a line here. The people need to know
about that.
21:17 Narrator: In dissent, Justice Harry Blackmun warned that the decision could lead to “the death
of soldiers, the destruction of alliances... And the inability of our diplomats to negotiate.”
21:28 Geoffrey Stone: And the dissenters in the Pentagon Papers case say, basically, what, are you
crazy? This makes no sense at all. All the government wants to do here is to have time to give us
an opportunity to know what the risks are. Now, it turns out that the truth is, when all the dust
settled, nothing published in the Pentagon Papers would satisfy the standard of clear and
present danger, of imminent harm.
21:56 Paula Franzese: The Pentagon Papers case was an extraordinary triumph in reaffirming some
of our most essential First Amendment values.
22:06 Narrator: After almost 200 years, the Court held the government accountable to those First
Amendment values. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are the priority, even during
wartime.
22:19 Geoffrey Stone: So the difference between what the Court did in World War I and what the
Court does here is about as night and day as one could ever imagine, right, a complete 180degree change in its willingness to step in and say we are going to enforce the First Amendment
with a vengeance. It’s not a decision that comes out of the blue, right? There’s an evolution in
the doctrine.
22:43 Narrator: And technology is also evolving. Today, just about anyone can publish.
22:49 Stephen Solomon: Daniel Ellsberg had 7,000 pages of the Pentagon Papers, and in order to get
it out there to the public, he had to make copies of it and give it to newspaper editors. I mean
you could put the entire Pentagon Papers on a thumb drive and upload it yourself to a website.
23:06 Narrator: But the decision in the Pentagon Papers case continues to protect the press. The press
can be critical, and the government can’t tell it what or what not to publish.
23:19 Akhil Amar: The First Amendment, the deep idea is, don’t trust government to make that
decision. Voters should make that decision for themselves. Readers should make that decision
for themselves. Ordinary citizens, we the people, can decide for ourselves.
23:37 Vincent Warren: The freedom of the press is an extraordinarily important aspect of the First
Amendment. And it’s important because the Constitution works on a checks-and-balances
system. But there’s another part of the equation and that really is the people. The people are
really the fourth branch of government. You have to know what the government is doing.
Page 10 of 11
— Video Transcript —
Freedom of the Press: The New York Times v. United States
24:15 Music and pictures end
Credits
Page 11 of 11
Source: http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Rights/Chapter_6_Our_Rights.pdf
Chapter 6
The Right to
Freedom of Speech
F
ree speech is our most fundamental—and our most contested—right. It is
an essential freedom because it is how we protect all of our other rights
and liberties. If we could not speak openly about the policies and actions
of government, then we would have no effective way to participate in the
democratic process or protest when we believed governmental behavior threatened our security or our freedom. Although Americans agree that free speech
is central to democratic government, we disagree sharply about what we mean
by speech and about where the right begins and ends. Speech clearly includes
words, but does it also include conduct or symbols? Certainly, we have the right
to criticize the government, but can we also advocate its overthrow? Does the
right to free speech allow us to incite hate or use foul language in public?
The framers of the Bill of Rights understood the importance of free expression and protected it under the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law. .
. abridging the freedom of speech.” Both English history and their own colonial
past had taught them to value this right, but their definition of free speech was
much more limited than ours. Less than a decade after the amendment’s ratification, Congress passed the Sedition Act of 1798, making it a crime to criticize
the government. Many citizens believed government could forbid speech that
threatened public order, as witnessed by numerous early nineteenth-century
laws restricting speech against slavery. During the Civil War, thousands of antiwar protestors were arrested on the theory that the First Amendment did not
protect disloyal speech. Labor unrest in the 1800s and 1890s brought similar
restraints on the right of politically unpopular groups, such as socialists, to criticize government’s failure to protect working people from the ills of industrialization and economic depression.
Freedom of speech did not become a subject of important court cases until the twentieth century when the Supreme Court announced one of the most
amous principles in constitutional law, the clear and present danger test. The
test was straightforward: government could not restrict speech unless it posed
a known, immediate threat to public safety. The standard sought to balance the
need for order with the right to speak freely. At its heart was the question of
proximity, or closeness, and degree. If speech brought about an action that was
dangerous under the immediate circumstances, such as falsely yelling “fire” in
a crowded theater, then it did not enjoy First Amendment protection.With this
case, Schenck v. United States (1919), the Court began a decades-long process
of seeking the right balance between free speech and public safety.
The balance, at first, was almost always on the side of order and security.
Another case decided in 1919, Debs v. United States, illustrates how restrictive
the test could be. Eugene Debs was a labor leader from Indiana who had run
for President four times as the candidate of the Socialist Party of America, once
“The free communication of
thoughts and opinions is one
of the invaluable rights of
man; and every citizen may
freely speak, write and print
on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that
liberty.”
—Pennsylvania Constitution
(1790)
The Right to Freedom of Speech 57
“The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man
in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. . . . The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present
danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress
has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree.”
—Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Schenck v. United States (1919)
polling more than one million votes. At a June 1918 rally in Chicago, while
U.S. troops were fighting in World War I, he told the working-class crowd, “You
need to know you are fit for something better than slavery and cannon fodder.”
He was sentenced under an existing federal statute to twenty years in prison for
inciting disloyalty and obstruction of military recruitment, which the Supreme
Court upheld.
For the next five decades, the Court wrestled with the right balance between
speech and order. Much of what defined freedom of speech emerged from challenges to the government’s ability to regulate or punish political protest. Each
case brought a new set of circumstances that allowed the justices an opportunity
to modify or extend the clear and present danger test. Many decisions recognized the abstract right of individuals to speak freely, but each one hedged this
right in important ways. Always in the background were conditions that pointed
to disorder, dissension, and danger—the Great Depression, World War II, and
the Cold War, among them—so the justices were cautious in expanding a right
that would expose America to greater threats. These cases, however, gradually
introduced a new perspective on the value of free speech in a democracy, namely, the belief that truth is best reached by the free trade in ideas.
The belief that society is best served by a marketplace of ideas open to all
opinions, no matter how radical, ultimately prevailed. In 1927, the Court had endorsed what came to be called the bad tendency test: if officials believed speech
was likely to lead to a bad result, such as urging people to commit a violent act,
it was not protected under the First Amendment even if no violence occurred.
By 1969, however, similar facts produced a different outcome. Ku Klux Klan
members in Ohio invited a television station to film their rally. Waving firearms,
they shouted racist and anti-Semitic slurs and threatened to march on Congress
before their leader was arrested and later convicted under a state law banning
speech that had a tendency to incite violence. The Supreme Court overturned his
conviction in Brandenburg v. Ohio and established the rule still in effect today:
the First Amendment protects the right to advocate the use of force or violence,
but it does not safeguard speech likely to incite or produce an immediate unlawful act. The Brandenburg test has allowed Nazis to march, Klan members to
hold rallies, and other extremist groups to promote views far outside the mainstream of public opinion.With few exceptions—fighting words and obscenity,
for example—government today cannot regulate the content of speech.
Even as society was coming to accept a wide range of political ideas, opposition to an unpopular war raised other questions about the limits and forms
of free speech. By the mid- to late 1960s, the Vietnam War divided Americans.
58 Our Rights
Although many citizens supported the use of U.S. troops to stop communism in
Asia, a growing minority, including many draft-age young people, took to the
streets to oppose the war. The protestors did not limit their efforts to antiwar
speeches; they also wore shirts with obscene slogans, burned draft cards, and
desecrated American flags. Using these symbols to protest, they argued, was
a form of free speech. Soon, the Supreme Court faced the question squarely in
a case involving a youthful protestor from the nation’s heartland: is symbolic
speech—messages using symbols or signs, not words—protected by the First
Amendment?
The first large-scale American demonstration against the Vietnam War occurred in November 1965 when more than 25,000 protestors converged on the
nation’s capital. Fifty Iowans made the long bus ride, and on the way home they
decided to make their opposition known locally by wearing black armbands to
work and school. One member of the peace contingent was Lorena Tinker, the
wife of a Des Moines Methodist minister and mother of five children. Mary Beth
Tinker, a thirteen-year-old eighth grader, followed her mother’s suggestion and
became one of a handful of local public school students who wore this symbol
of protest to school. This act placed her in the middle of a national controversy
about student rights and freedom of expression.
In many ways, Mary Beth was a normal eighth grader. She was a good
student who enjoyed singing, spending time with her friends, and taking part in
church activities.What made her different was a commitment to social justice,
a passion encouraged by her parents, both of whom were known for their activism. Her parents wanted their children to share their moral and social values,
and Mary Beth responded eagerly to their invitation to participate with them.
By the time she became a teenager, she already had attended her first protest,
accompanying her father to a rally about fair housing.
Mary Beth Tinker, her brother, John, and a handful of Des Moines students
planned their demonstration for December 16, 1965. The students’ aim was not
to protest the war but to mourn its casualties, Vietnamese and American, and
to show support for proposed peace talks. School officials, however, promised
to suspend anyone who came to school wearing the armbands, and the school
principal suspended Mary Beth and sent her home. She was one of five students
suspended that day for wearing the offending cloth. Significantly, the school ban
applied only to armbands, in other words, to students who opposed the Vietnam
War; a number of students that day wore an array of other symbols, including
the Iron Cross, a Nazi medal.
When the school board upheld the suspensions, the Tinkers persuaded the
Iowa Civil Liberties Union to take the case to federal court. Two lower federal
courts agreed with the school’s action, rebuffing the argument that the policy
violated the First Amendment guarantee of free speech. The Supreme Court decided otherwise. In its 7-to-2 decision, announced in February 1969, the justices
held that the wearing of armbands is a symbolic act akin to “pure speech” and
protected by the right to free expression. The protesting students posed no threat
to the order required for effective instruction, nor did the wearing of armbands
interfere with the school’s educational mission. In this instance, the balance between order and liberty was weighted on the side of the First Amendment. Students and teachers, the Court concluded, do not “shed their constitutional rights
to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
Symbolic speech has been the focus of some of our greatest constitutional
drama.Words may be powerful and provocative, but symbols are often more
The Right to Freedom of Speech 59
“Restriction of free thought
and free speech is the most
dangerous of all subversions.
It is the one un-American act
that could most easily defeat
us.”
—Justice William O. Douglas,
“The One Un-American Act”
(1953)
60 Our Rights
inflammatory because they are visual and evoke an emotional response. We live
in an age when we use pictures and symbols to convey important messages,
whether in politics or the marketplace. For these reasons, the Supreme Court’s
recognition of symbolic speech as a right protected by the First Amendment
has been a significant development. Twenty-five years after Mary Beth Tinker
put on her armband in remembrance of the war dead, Life magazine featured a
handful of civil liberties cases to celebrate the bicentennial of the Bill of Rights.
Mary Beth’s case was included, even though the rights of students remained,
and still are, more limited than those of adult citizens. But her actions as an
eighth grader expanded our conception of constitutionally protected speech to
include the symbols we use to express our convictions.
More than most other recent decisions, cases involving symbolic speech
have revealed how contentious the right of free speech remains in our society. In
1989, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment protected individuals
who burned the American flag in protest. This decision was highly controversial,
and it has resulted in numerous attempts to amend the Constitution to protect the
flag and, in effect, limit speech in this circumstance. The outcome of this effort
is uncertain, but the debate raises important questions: What role does this right
play in our democracy? How does it contribute to our liberty as Americans?
The right to speak freely, without restraint, is essential to democratic government because it helps us develop better laws and policies through challenge,
rebuttal, and debate.When we all have the ability to speak in the public forum,
offensive opinions can be combated with an opposing argument, a more inclusive approach, a more effective idea. We tolerate offensive speech and protect
the right to speak even for people who would deny it to us because we believe
that exposing their thoughts and opinions to open debate will result in the discovery of truth. This principle is an old one in Western thought. U.S. Supreme
Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s dissent in Abrams v. United States, a
1919 case suppressing free speech, is a classic statement of this view: “The best
test of truth is the power of thought to get itself accepted in the competition of
the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which [the public’s] wishes
safely can be carried out.”
Governmental actions to deny differing points of view, even distasteful or
unpopular opinions, rob us of the range of ideas that might serve the interests
of society more effectively. In a case decided almost a decade before Tinker v.
Des Moines, the Supreme Court found this rationale especially applicable to
the classroom. “The Nation’s future,” the justices wrote, “depends upon leaders
trained through wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth out of a multitude of tongues.” As a nation, we are willing to live with
the often bitter conflict over ideas because we believe it will lead to truth and to
improved lives for all citizens.We recognize that freedom of speech is the first
freedom of democracy, as the English poet John Milton argued during his own
seventeenth-century struggle to gain this right: “Give me the liberty to know, to
utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.” The ability to speak freely allows us to pursue truth, to challenge falsehoods, to correct
mistakes—all are necessary for a healthy society.
Free speech also reflects a commitment to individual freedom and autonomy, the right to decide for ourselves and to pursue our own destiny. Throughout
our history, we have been so committed to individual choice that many foreign
observers believe it is our most characteristic trait. We see it reflected daily in
everything from advertising slogans—“Have It Your Way”— to fashion state-
ments, but fail to recognize how closely freedom is tied to the right to speak
freely. Free speech guarantees us an individual voice, no matter how far removed our opinions and beliefs are from mainstream society. With this voice we
are free to contribute as individuals to the marketplace of ideas or a marketplace
of goods, as well as to decide how and under what circumstances we will join
with others to decide social and governmental policies.
A commitment to free speech, of course, will not resolve all conflict, not
if our history is any guide.The debate is most contentious during times of war
or other moments when national security is at stake. Even then—perhaps especially then—we will continue to fight over words and symbols because they
express our deepest hopes and our most worrisome fears. This contest over what
speech is acceptable and what is not has been a constant theme of our past.
Rarely do these struggles produce a neat consensus. More often, intemperate
rhetoric and bitter division have been their legacy, and this angry clamor is one
of the basic noises of our history.What makes the struggle to protect free speech
worthwhile is its ability to serve as a lever for change.When we practice our
right to speak openly, we are defining the contours of our democracy. It is messy
work, but through it, we keep the Constitution alive and, with it, our dreams of
a just society.
The Right to Freedom of Speech 61
“Free Trade in Ideas”
Jacob Abrams was a Russian immigrant and anarchist convicted of violating the Sedition Act of 1918, which made it a crime to advocate anything that would impede the
war effort during World War I. In 1917 Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., had written
the Court’s opinion in Schenck v. United States, upholding similar convictions because
Congress had a right to regulate speech that posed a “clear and present danger” to public
safety. But by the time Abrams’s appeal reached the Court in 1919, Holmes had modified his views. Disturbed by antiradical hysteria, he dissented from the majority’s decision
upholding Abrams’s conviction in Abrams v. United States. His eloquent discussion of the
connection between freedom of speech and the search for truth soon became the standard
used by the Supreme Court to judge free speech cases until Brandenberg v. Ohio in 1972.
The First Amendment, Holmes reasoned, protected the expression of all opinions “unless
they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes
of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country.”
But as against dangers peculiar to war, as against
others, the principle of the right to free speech is always the same. It is only the present danger of immediate evil or an intent to bring it about that warrants Congress in setting a limit to the expression
of opinion where private rights are not concerned.
Congress certainly cannot forbid all effort to change
the mind of the country. Now nobody can suppose
that the surreptitious publishing of a silly leaflet by
an unknown man, without more, would present any
immediate danger that its opinions would hinder the
success of the government arms or have any appreciable tendency to do so. . . .
Persecution for the expression of opinions seems
to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your
premises or your power and want a certain result
with all your heart you naturally express your wishes
in law and sweep away all opposition. To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you think
the speech impotent, as when a man says that he has
squared the circle, or that you do not care whole
heartedly for the result, or that you doubt either your
power or your premises. But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they
may come to believe even more than they believe
the very foundations of their own conduct that the
ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade
62 Our Rights
in ideas—that the best test of truth is the power of
the thought to get itself accepted in the competition
of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon
which their wishes safely can be carried out. That at
any rate is the theory of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment. Every year if
not every day we have to wager our salvation upon
some prophecy based upon imperfect knowledge.
While that experiment is part of our system I think
that we should be eternally vigilant against attempts
to check the expression of opinions that we loathe
and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so
imminently threaten immediate interference with the
lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country. . . .
Only the emergency that makes it immediately dangerous to leave the correction of evil counsels to time
warrants making any exception to the sweeping command, “Congress shall make no law abridging the
freedom of speech.” Of course I am speaking only
of expressions of opinion and exhortations, which
were all that were uttered here, but I regret that I cannot put into more impressive words my belief that in
their conviction upon this indictment the defendants
were deprived of their rights under the Constitution
of the United States.
“Malicious Words” versus
“Free Communication”
In response to fears about imminent wars with France in 1798, the Federalist-controlled Congress passed a series of four acts known collectively as the Alien and Sedition
Acts. Section 2 of the Sedition Act made it a crime to make defamatory statements about
the government or President. (Sedition is an action inciting resistance to lawful authority
and tending to lead to the overthrow of the government.) The act was designed to suppress
political opposition. Its passage by Congress reveals how limited the definition of the right
of free speech was for some Americans only a few years after the ratification of the First
Amendment.
Sec. 2. . . . That if any person shall write, print, utter,
or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written,
printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and
willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering
or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious
writing or writings against the government of the
United States, or either house of the Congress of the
United States, or the President of the United States,
with intent to defame the said government, or either
house of the said Congress, or the said President, or
to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or
disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any
of them, the hatred of the good people of the United
States, or to stir up sedition within the United States,
or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for
opposing or resisting any law of the United Sates, or
any act of the President of the United States, done
in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in
him vested by the constitution of the United States,
or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or
to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any
foreign nation against the United States, their people
or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having
jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not
exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.
James Madison, congressman from Virginia, and Thomas Jefferson, the sitting Vice
President, secretly drafted resolutions protesting the Sedition Act as unconstitutional. The
Virginia and Kentucky legislatures passed these resolutions in 1798. Both resolutions especially pointed to the act’s violation of First Amendment protections, as seen in the Virginia
Resolution here.
Resolved, . . . That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming
infractions of the Constitution in the two late cases
of the “Alien and Sedition Acts” passed at the last
session of Congress; the first of which exercises a
power no where delegated to the federal government, and which by uniting legislative and judicial
powers to those of executive, subverts the general
principles of free government; as well as the particular organization, and positive provisions of the
federal constitution; and the other of which acts, exercises in like manner, a power not delegated by the
constitution, but on the contrary, expressly and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thereto; a
power, which more than any other, ought to produce
universal alarm, because it is levelled against that
right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people
thereon, which has ever been justly deemed, the only
effectual guardian of every other right.
The Right to Freedom of Speech 63
That this state having by its Convention, which
ratified the federal Constitution,expressly declared,
that among other essential rights, “the Liberty of
Conscience and of the Press cannot be cancelled,
abridged, restrained, or modified by any authority
of the United States,” and from its extreme anxiety
to guard these rights from every possible attack of
sophistry or ambition, having with other states, rec-
ommended an amendment for that purpose, which
amendment was, in due time, annexed to the Constitution; it would mark a reproachable inconsistency,
and criminal degeneracy, if an indifference were
now shewn, to the most palpable violation of one
of the Rights, thus declared and secured; and to the
establishment of a precedent which may be fatal to
the other.
The Sedition Act expired in 1801 but not until a number of the Federalists’ opponents,
including Congressman Matthew Lyon of Vermont, had been convicted of violating the
law.Today, historians consider the Sedition Act to have been a gross misuse of government
power. In 1798, the Kentucky Resolutions focused on the rights of states to determine the
limits of free speech.
Resolved, that it is true as a general principle, and is
also expressly declared by one of the amendments
to the Constitution, that “the powers not delegated
to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people;” and that no power
over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or
freedom of the press being delegated to the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
64 Our Rights
States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of
right remain, and were reserved to the States or the
people: that thus was manifested their determination
to retain to themselves the right of judging how far
the licentiousness of speech and of the press may
be abridged without lessening their useful freedom,
and how far those abuses which cannot be separated
from their use should be tolerated, rather than the
use be destroyed.
Source: http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Rights/Chapter_7_Our_Rights.pdf
Chapter 7
The Right to
Freedom of the Press
T
he founders of the United States believed a free press was a prerequisite
for a free society. James Madison, often called the Father of the Constitution, said it was “one of the great bulwarks of liberty.” Thomas Jefferson
said if he had a choice between government without newspapers or newspapers
without government, he would choose newspapers. It was not mere coincidence,
then, that the First Amendment guarantees the right to a free press—“Congress
shall make no law abridging freedom of the press”—and links it closely to the
right to free speech. To the founders, they were twin pillars of American freedom.
The relationship between a free press and liberty was not an issue before the
invention of movable type in the mid-1400s. The printing press provided rulers
a new way to spread their authority more quickly and over a wider area, but it
also gave opponents the same ability to criticize government. To minimize this
threat, the British Crown licensed printers and required official approval before
publication. (This form of censorship is commonly called prior restraint.) Even
when the licensing law expired in England in 1694, it continued in the colonies, thereby allowing officials to suppress ideas or information they considered
harmful. Printers could be punished criminally, for example, if they published
unapproved criticisms of the church or state.
During the struggle with Great Britain, colonists used pamphlets, broadsides, and newspapers to make their protests, debate their differences, and rally
support for independence. The press was valuable to the revolutionary cause because the printed word reached a much wider audience than sermons, speeches,
or letters, the other main avenues for communication. As a result, constitutions
in the young states included the right to a free press as a limit on governmental
power. The revolutionary generation believed this right was part of their heritage
as Englishmen. Greater press freedom had been one result of the seventeenthcentury struggle between king and Parliament for supremacy, and the colonists
thought the right extended to them through their charters of settlement. An important commentary on the common law at the time of independence declared
that “the liberty of the press is. . . essential to the nature of a free state. . . [and]
consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications.” This understanding
served as the foundation for the First Amendment protection.
As with free speech, however, people disagreed almost immediately with
the meaning of this right. The 1790s was an especially troublesome decade for
press freedom. The nation was on the brink of war with France when Congress passed the Sedition Act in 1798 to punish journalists who criticized, or
libeled, the government. Under the claim of protecting national security, more
than twenty-five people went to jail, convicted of criminal libel. Critics charged
the government with using its power to put down political opposition, but the act
“That the freedom of the
press is one of the great
bulwarks of liberty, and can
never be restrained but by
despotick governments.”
—Virginia Declaration of Rights
(1776)
The Right to Freedom of the Press 65
expired before the Supreme Court could consider its constitutionality.
The nineteenth century witnessed an explosion in the number and spread of
newspapers and magazines. This rapid increase in publications and a subsequent
decline in the price of a newspaper—one penny by the 1850s—changed the
nature of journalism. Attacks on parties and politicians declined in favor of human-interest and crime stories. The emergence of the Associated Press, a newsgathering collective, in 1848 and Western Union’s transcontinental telegraph in
1861 opened a national market for news. By the end of the century, newspapers
had become big businesses, with rival publishers competing for a share of an
expanding audience. The power of the press could be seen during the SpanishAmerican War in 1898, when newspapers owned by William Randolph Hearst
and Joseph Pulitzer published vivid accounts of Spanish atrocities in Cuba to
stir war fever. Such news sold papers, as did shocking stories about the sordid
side of private lives. The popular term for this kind of reporting was “muckraking,” but in fact many of the scandalous accounts of the day exposed official
graft and corruption, as well as the dire living conditions in urban slums. Some
newspapers claimed to avoid the excesses of investigative reporting—the New
York Times, for example, sought to be objective by offering only “All the News
That’s Fit to Print”—but increasingly, journalism was about creating news and
not simply reporting it.
This change brought calls for legal restraints, which went unheeded because the popular press enjoyed wide readership. More at risk were papers that
challenged the power of the state. Many were progressive and socialist publications that campaigned for reforms considered extreme at the time—labor laws,
for example—but which were adopted in later decades. State laws sought to
control these publications under “criminal anarchy” statutes, especially after an
anarchist assassinated President William McKinley in 1901. Communist party
and other leftist newspapers were targets, as were ethnic newspapers, because
they challenged strongly held American values. World War I brought further
concern about the press, especially when newspapers published items thought
to threaten national security, even if the government’s definition of threats was
overly broad. It was not long before serious-minded people were asking whether
the press was too free or too powerful: what, exactly, did the First Amendment
protect?
The Supreme Court considered this important question in the early 1930s.
An anti-Semitic publisher from the upper Midwest printed a scandal sheet filled
with ethnic slurs, and the government sought to shut the paper down. Did hatemongers enjoy the protection of the First Amendment? For the first time since
the ratification of the Bill of Rights, the justices faced squarely the question of
what freedom of the press means.
Corruption was common in Minneapolis during the 1920s, as it was in nu
merous other American cities. It was the era of Prohibition; bootlegging, speakeasies, and gambling were common, and to protect their illegal interests, gangsters paid off local police and politicians. In Minneapolis, the mayor, chief of
police, and district attorney were all reputed to be on the mob’s payroll. The
city’s respectable newspapers ignored these rumors, and scandal sheets soon
filled the void, luridly describing the prostitution, gambling, and sexual adventures of the city’s upper crust who, many people believed, profited from crime
and disorder. The Twin City Reporter was one of these tabloids, or rags. Its owners, Howard Guildford and Jay Near, practiced a brand of journalism that teetered on the edge of legality and propriety. They had a nose for corruption, but
66 Our Rights
exposing wrongdoing was frequently a way to further their own self-interests.
Jay Near was a pen for hire. His favorite targets were the elites of society, the
rich and powerful, whom he always portrayed in the worst light. At the Reporter, he found a paper willing to pay for his anti-Semitic, antiblack, and antilabor
screeds. For several years, Guildford and Near plied their trade, bribing police
for tip-offs and publishing stories under headlines such as “Smooth Minneapolis
Doctor with Woman in St. Paul Hotel” and “White Slavery Trade:Well-Known
Local Man Is Ruining Women and Living Off Their Earnings.” Minority groups
and most institutions were attacked as well, usually in crude and hostile terms. By 1917, the two men tired of their work and left Minneapolis, only to
return ten years later with another entry in the weekly newspaper game. They
created the Saturday Press and, for their first issue, made plans to report on an
alliance with police that allowed the current owner of the Twin City Reporter to
run an illegal gambling joint. The police chief got wind of their scheme and shut
down the paper before it could publish the story. His authority for this action
was simply the power of his office. When the Saturday Press finally appeared
on newsstands, it reported on mob threats and official misconduct. In retaliation,
Guildford was gunned down by two assailants. While recovering, he and Near
put out an issue that spewed forth hate and bitterness, blaming Jewish mobsters
for the corruption and violence that infected the city. “There have been too many
men in this city and especially those in official life, who have been taking orders
and suggestions from JEW GANGSTERS. . . . It is Jew, Jew, Jew,” they wrote,
“as long as one cares to comb over the records.”
The diatribe persuaded the county attorney, later a three-term governor, to
“put out of business forever the Saturday Press and other sensational weeklies.”
He relied upon a 1925 state law, known as the “gag law,” that declared such
newspapers to be public nuisances and stopped them from publishing unless the
stories were not only true but also “published with good motive and for justifiable ends.” A local judge granted an injunction, a legal order forbidding Guildford and Near from distributing any paper that attacked public officials. The
order was upheld on appeal by the Minnesota Supreme Court, which defended
freedom of the press as an ideal even as it denied the Saturday Press a right to
publish. “In Minnesota,” the state chief justice wrote, “no agency can hush the
sincere and honest voice of the press, but our [state] constitution was never
intended to protect malice, scandal, and defamation when untrue or published
with bad motives or without justifiable ends.” Truth alone was not a defense:
“There is no constitutional right to publish a fact merely because it is true,” the
court declared. The law protected the press’s liberty, not its right to offend.
Near sought help for an appeal to federal courts from two unlikely allies—
Roger Baldwin, liberal founder of the American Civil Liberties Union, a new
organization dedicated to promoting individual rights, and Robert McCormick,
the conservative publisher of the Chicago Tribune. Baldwin especially disagreed with the Saturday Press’s content and style, whereas McCormick shared
Near’s anticommunism and bigotry against immigrants. McCormick and Baldwin agreed on one thing, however—the First Amendment gave Near the right to
publish without government censorship.
The Supreme Court decided Near v. Minnesota in 1931. Near won. Writing for the 5-to-4 majority, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes announced his
view of the Minnesota law: “This is the essence of censorship.” He acknowledged that the press could make false accusations and damage reputations, but
the proper remedy was to sue later under libel laws for monetary damages. It
The Right to Freedom of the Press 67
“The fact that the liberty of
the press may be abused by
miscreant purveyors of scandal does not make any the less
necessary the immunity of the
press from previous restraint
in dealing with official misconduct.”
—Chief Justice Charles Evans
Hughes, Near v. Minnesota (1931)
68 Our Rights
harmed democracy to give government the power to censor because government
was often a target of the criticism it sought to suppress.Without the vigorous
public debate spurred by the press, truth would be hard to find and liberty would
suffer. Of course, the freedom to publish was not absolute, the chief justice
continued.During war, for example, government could restrain the press in the
interests of national security, but Near’s case did not pose this threat. The government could not prevent him from publishing, no matter how offensive or
reckless his views were.
After the decision, the Saturday Press reappeared under a new masthead,
“The Paper That Refused to Stay Gagged.” Jay Near’s triumph notwithstanding,
the newspaper folded within twelve months; two years later, he died. His legacy
did not come from his sensational stories but from the news he made while pursuing a right to publish his often reckless charges. The case involving his paper
established the legal principle that has defined freedom of the press in the United
States ever since. The right to a free press means the government cannot censor
what the press chooses to publish. Once the press has information it considers
newsworthy, the government seldom, if ever, can prohibit its dissemination. At
the heart of the First Amendment, in brief, lies hostility to prior restraint—the
idea that government officials must approve a story before it can be published.
Recent decades have witnessed a number of cases involving free press
claims. Most have focused on the adversarial relationship between the government and the press that emerged during the civil rights movement and Vietnam
War. Then and now, state and federal officials at times try to control access to information or to use the threat of libel to stop the press from reporting the news.
The Supreme Court generally has rejected these efforts. For example, when
a Montgomery, Alabama, official sued the New York Times for libel and sought
damages based on minor mistakes made when reporting the truth about the desegregation struggle in the South in the 1960s, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the press. The First Amendment, the unanimous justices concluded in
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), protected the press not only from prior
restraint but also from any punishment—imprisonment, fines, or civil damage
awards—for reports about a public official’s conduct unless actual malice was
involved. “Erroneous statement is inevitable in public debate,” the Court wrote,
and even false statements must “be protected if the freedoms of expression are
to have the ‘breathing space’ that they . . . ‘need to survive.’” Giving a wide
berth to the press serves a vital public purpose: it preserves open government
and allows citizens to hold officials accountable for their actions.
What if the public’s right to know runs up against government claims of
secrecy for reasons of national security? Near v. Minnesota recognized that protecting the nation might trump the right to publish, but under what conditions?
This question came up in 1971 when the New York Times decided to publish the
stolen Pentagon Papers, a secret study proving the government had misinformed
the public about its war goals in Southeast Asia and the prospects for victory.
President Richard Nixon, for the first time in the nation’s history, instructed the
government to go to court to stop their publication on grounds that it put the
nation’s security at risk. The Supreme Court refused this request, in a 6-to-3
vote, in New York Times Co. v. United States; it held that the government had
not demonstrated a need to stop publication. Prior restraint, a majority of the
justices agreed, required extraordinary circumstances.Without a free press, the
government could hide its actions from the public, making it difficult for people
to hold officials accountable. How this principle will play out in the aftermath of
the events of September 11, 2001, or whether the threat of terrorism requires a
different balance between freedom and security, is still unresolved. How do we
as a society balance our need for protection against plots to bring us harm with
our need for information that allows us to judge whether government’s actions
are proper? We have reached no fixed answer to this question, and perhaps these
issues will have to be addressed case by case, at least initially, until we understand more about the threat we face. Also unsettled is the effect of new technology, such as the Internet, on our understanding of freedom of the press.To
date, we continue to embrace open access to information and with it the right of
people to publish without restraint in this new medium. This position contrasts
sharply with other societies. For instance, in 2006, China banned Internet search
firms, such as Google and Yahoo, from doing business in the country unless they
blocked access to information the government considered dangerous.
New threats and new technologies have always led to new questions about
the extent of our rights. No right is absolute, of course. The right to a free press
does not apply equally to obscenity or to a reporter’s protection of confidential
sources, for example. Student-run publications do not enjoy full First Amendment protection against prior restraint.We impose certain fairness restrictions
on television and radio because they use a limited public resource, the airwaves,
to broadcast the news.We also recognize that rights at times are in conflict, as
when the right to a trial by an impartial jury clashes with the right of a free press
to report on an investigation and trial. This issue was a concern in both the trials
of O. J. Simpson, who was acquitted in 1995 of killing his ex-wife and another
man, and Scott Peterson, convicted of killing his pregnant wife in 2004, to mention two well-known examples. But even as we search for the right balance
between rights and responsibilities, we have always held firm on one principle:
prior restraints on the press are unconstitutional.
In doing so, we have endorsed the people’s right to know as a fundamental
liberty in a free and democratic society.We also have kept faith with our history.
When the First Congress was debating the amendments that became the Bill of
Rights, a continuing theme was the deep and abiding link between knowledge
and freedom. Without the ability to know what was happening, without a free
press, self-government was not possible—and without self-government, liberty
was not possible. Public knowledge made government accountable to the people, the final authority in a democratic republic. It was this understanding that
prompted Edmund Randolph, a revolutionary leader from Virginia, to remind
James Madison of how indispensable this right was to the nation’s future. “The
liberty of the press,” he wrote, “ought not to be surrendered but with blood.”
“A free press stands as one of
the great interpreters between
the government and the people. To allow it to be fettered
is to fetter ourselves.”
—Justice George Sutherland,
Grosjean v. American Press Co.
(1936)
The Right to Freedom of the Press 69
“Democracy Must Know the Truth”
J. P. Tumulty was secretary to the President during Woodrow Wilson’s administration. In this role, he served as Wilson’s liaison to the press.When Congress was debating
the Espionage Bill of 1917, Tumulty warned Wilson that the bill, which made it a crime
to publish reports that interfered with U.S. military success or gave encouragement to the
enemy, was perceived as an attempt to control the press. In a letter dated May 8, 1917, he
reminded the President about the bad experience with the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
and argued that “the more completely the attempt to censor the press is killed, the better
for the cause of freedom.” Tumulty’s advice notwithstanding, the act passed and resulted
in numerous convictions, especially of antiwar socialist editors and writers. The tension
noted by Tumulty in 1917—press freedom versus protection of war secrets—continues today, as witnessed by the debate over a New York Times revelation in 2006 of the mining
of telephone records by the National Security Agency as part of the federal government’s
antiterrorism efforts.
The path of the Espionage Bill will be made more
difficult by the memorandum issued yesterday by the
State Department and distributed broadcast, warning
all officials not to talk with newspapermen “even on
insignificant matters of fact or detail.” I know how
strongly you feel on the matter of a strict censorship
but I would not be doing my full duty to you and
the Administration if I did not say to you that there
is gradually growing a feeling of bitter resentment
against the whole business, which is daily spreading.
The experience of the Administration of President
Adams in fostering the Alien and Sedition Laws bids
us beware of this whole business. Of course there is a
great difference between the situation that confronts
us and that which confronted some of your predecessors; but the whole atmosphere surrounding the
Espionage Bill is hurtful and injurious, because of
the impression which has gained root with startling
intensity that the bill is really a gigantic machine,
erected for the despotic control of the press and that
the power provided for in the bill must of necessity
be delegated by the President and that the press will
be controlled by a host of small bureaucrats who
will interpret the president’s instructions according
70 Our Rights
to their own intellects. I have gathered during the
last week editorial comment from various journals
throughout the country which have been our firmest
supporters and they are unanimous in condemning
what they consider to be the unjust features of this
legislation. . . . The American people are called to
a mighty effort to save the world from an attempt
at autocratic domination. Great sacrifices are before
them. They are ready to endure whatever is necessary for the work in hand. But if they are to try their
hardest, they must know that no effort is wasted;
that public offices are administered with faith and
efficiency. Public judgment must be passed on those
who are weak and those who are strong in the Government. When a department requires reorganization, the people must know it, other wise it might
not be reorganized. In fight for the truth, democracy
must know the truth. The more completely the attempt to censor the press is killed, the better for the
cause of freedom. The press has no desire to expose
military secrets. It wants America to win. . . .
Sincerely yours,
Tumulty
First Amendment Violations
In June 1971, the New York Times published the first installment of the so-called Pentagon Papers, a classified 7,000-page document on the conduct of the Vietnam War, which
had begun in 1964. The report revealed that the government had kept information about
the conduct of the war from the American public. The Nixon administration secured a
lower court order temporarily restraining publication of further installments, but the judge
denied a permanent injunction, or order to stop publication. The government appealed,
contending that publication would endanger the troops and undermine the peace talks
then underway. The Supreme Court heard the case immediately and voted 6 to 3 to deny
the government’s request. In New York Times Co. v. United States and United States v.
Washington Post Co. (1971), Justice William Brennan wrote a concurring opinion in which
he argued that even halting publication temporarily to review the issues constituted an
unconstitutional prior restraint of the press.
The entire thrust of the Government’s claim throughout these cases has been that publication of the material sought to be enjoined “could,” or “might,” or
“may” prejudice the national interest in various ways.
But the First Amendment tolerates absolutely no
prior judicial restraints of the press predicated upon
surmise or conjecture that untoward consequences
may result. Our cases, it is true, have indicated that
there is a single, extremely narrow class of cases in
which the First Amendment’s ban on prior judicial
restraint may be overridden. Our cases have thus far
indicated that such cases may arise only when the
Nation “is at war,”. . . during which times “[n]o one
would question but that a government might prevent
actual obstruction to its recruiting service or the
publication of the sailing dates of transports or the
number and location of troops.” Even if the present
world situation were assumed to be tantamount to a
time of war, or if the power of presently available
armaments would justify even in peacetime the suppression of information that would set in motion a
nuclear holocaust, in neither of these actions has the
Government presented or even alleged that publication of items from or based upon the material at issue would cause the happening of an event of that
nature. “[T]he chief purpose of [the First Amendment’s] guaranty [is] to prevent previous restraints
upon publication.”. . . Thus, only governmental allegation and proof that publication must inevitably,
directly, and immediately cause the occurrence of an
event kindred to imperiling the safety of a transport
already at sea can support even the issuance of an
interim restraining order. In no event may mere conclusions be sufficient: for if the Executive Branch
seeks judicial aid in preventing publication, it must
inevitably submit the basis upon which that aid is
sought to scrutiny by the judiciary. And therefore,
every restraint issued in this case, whatever its form,
has violated the First Amendment—and not less so
because that restraint was justified as necessary to afford the courts an opportunity to examine the claim
more thoroughly. Unless and until the Government
has clearly made out its case, the First Amendment
commands that no injunction may issue.
The Right to Freedom of the Press 71
Source: http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/The%20Pursuit%20of%20Justice/69_75_Ch_8.pdf
8
The Latitude and Limits
of Free Speech
Schenck v. United States (1919)
Abrams v. United States (1919)
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says, “Congress shall make
no law. . . abridging the freedom of speech.” It expresses an absolute prohibition of legislation that would deny this freedom. Constitutional protection of
this fundamental civil liberty, however, has not been absolute. Congress has
enacted laws limiting freedom of speech under certain conditions, and the
federal courts, in certain cases, have endorsed these restrictive acts.
It took a very long time, more than 125 years after ratification of the First
Amendment in 1791, for the first cases about federal laws limiting free speech
to arrive at the U.S. Supreme Court. During the years that America participated in World War I, from April 6, 1917, until November 11, 1918, Congress
enacted laws limiting freedom of speech in order to protect national security
against spies, saboteurs, and obstructers of the national war effort.
Government leaders and many in the general public also believed that the
Communist Party that came to power in Russia during the 1917 Russian Revolution, one year before the end of World War I, posed a threat to America.
Russia’s Communist rulers advocated subversion and the overthrow of noncommunist governments throughout the world, which led many Americans to
suspect that Socialists and Communists in the United States would collaborate with the international communist movement against the interests of the
United States. Thus, laws enacted to protect national security during World
War I were also used during and after the war to curtail activities of American
supporters of communism and socialism.
In June 1917, barely two months after the nation’s entry into World War
I, Congress passed the Espionage Act, which enabled the federal government
to punish certain kinds of dissent against its wartime policies. The Espionage
Act provided that
whoever. . . shall willfully make or convey reports or false statements
with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval
forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies and whoever. . . shall willfully cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty,
mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States...
shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not
more than 20 years or both.”
Schenck v. United States
•
•
•
•
249 U.S. 47 (1919)
Decided: March 3, 1919
Vote: 9–0
Opinion of the Court: Oliver
Wendell Holmes Jr.
Abrams v. United States
•
•
•
•
250 U.S. 616 (1919)
•
Dissenting Opinion: Oliver
Wendell Holmes Jr. (Louis D.
Brandeis)
Decided: November 10, 1919
Vote: 7–2
Opinion of the Court: John H.
Clarke
In May 1918, Congress passed the Sedition Act, which augmented the
already strong powers provided in the Espionage Act of 1917, by outlawing
any speech or writing that in any way might impugn and undermine the
U.S. government, flag, military forces, or Constitution or intend to pro-
The Latitude and Limits of Free Speech 69
mote resistance against federal government policies, such as the drafting of
able-bodied men into the armed forces.
Many Americans believed the Espionage and Sedition Acts violated the
Constitution’s First Amendment guarantees of free speech and press. But from
June 1917 until the middle of 1921, more than two thousand people were prosecuted for violating these restrictive federal laws, and more than one thousand
were convicted. Among the several convictions appealed to the U.S. Supreme
Court, those of Charles Schenck and Jacob Abrams became significant cases
in the development of the Court’s doctrine on the latitude and limits of free
speech. Schenck’s case originated with his August 1917 arrest for violating the
Espionage Act. Abrams’s case began one year later, in August 1918, when police arrested and jailed him and his associates for breaking the law under the
Espionage and Sedition Acts.
Charles Schenck, general secretary of the Socialist Party in the United States,
was an outspoken critic of America’s participation in World War I. To express
opposition to the war, Schenck and his Socialist Party associates printed and
mailed about 1,500 leaflets to men eligible for the draft. The leaflets denounced
the draft as involuntary servitude and therefore a violation of the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Constitution. The pamphlet also argued that participation in
World War I did not serve the best interests of the American people. It claimed
that conscripting men into the armed forces to fight in the war was a “monstrous
wrong against humanity in the interest of Wall Street’s chosen few.”
Schenck was arrested and convicted of violating the Espionage Act. At his
trial, Schenck claimed that his First Amendment right to free speech had been
violated. For the first time, the U.S. Supreme Court directly faced the question
of whether the federal government might limit speech under special circumstances.
The Court unanimously decided against Schenck, upholding his conviction and ruling that the Espionage Act did not unconstitutionally limit his First
Amendment rights of free speech and press. Writing for the Court, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. presented a novel test to determine when and how the
government might limit free speech. When spoken or written words “create a
clear and present danger” of bringing about evils that Congress has the authority
to prevent, said Holmes, then the government has an obligation to stop them.
Holmes argued that Schenck’s actions had created the kind of circumstance that
the federal government could constitutionally prevent through the Espionage
Act.
Holmes next provided one of the most memorable examples ever used in a
Supreme Court opinion to clarify an argument. “The most stringent protection
of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and
causing a panic.” Thus, Holmes linked the latitude or limits of political speech
to the “circumstances in which it is done.”
Holmes argued that Schenck and his associates intended to influence others from compliance with the federal draft law. If enough men had responded
favorably to Schenck’s message, then the federal government would have been
prevented from carrying out the will of the people, endorsed by their representatives in Congress, who had voted overwhelmingly to participate in the war in
order to defend critical national interests. Schenck’s attempt to severely obstruct
the war effort was certainly among “the kind of substantive evils that Congress
had a right to prevent,” wrote Holmes.
Under different circumstances, such as those in peacetime, Schenck’s ideas
70 The Pursuit of Justice
would have been protected by the Constitution’s First Amendment, said Holmes. But urging men to resist the draft during a time of war presents a “clear and
present danger” to the nation. Thus Holmes declared, “When a nation is at war,
many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its efforts
that their utterance will not be protected by any constitutional right.”
Before the Schenck case, both state and federal courts had relied only upon
a doctrine called “the bad tendency” test to adjudicate freedom of speech cases.
If speech tended to have bad effects, then it might be constitutionally restricted.
For example, speech that threatened public order, subverted established standards of morality, or obstructed national defense in wartime could be legislatively restricted. Further, there was a presumption of constitutionality for laws
limiting speech according to the “bad tendency” test, if the restrictive legislation
clearly reflected traditional community standards.
In two cases decided only a few days after Schenck, Court watchers were
surprised by Justice Holmes’ opinions. In Frohwerk v. United States (1919) and
Debs v. United States (1919), Holmes based the Court’s decisions only on the
conventional “bad tendency” test and did not mention the “clear and present
danger” doctrine.
The Court unanimously upheld the conviction of Jacob Frohwerk, who had
written articles for a German-language newspaper that urged resistance to the
military draft. Holmes said that Frohwerk’s words violated the Espionage Act,
because they might “be enough to kindle a flame of resistance.” Indeed, this was
a “bad tendency” but Holmes did not make a causal connection to a particular
circumstance, as his “clear and present danger” test made necessary.
The Court also unanimously upheld the conviction of Eugene Debs, the
leader of the American Socialist Party. Debs had delivered a speech filled with
socialist ideology in Canton, Ohio. He criticized the very idea of war and advocated resistance to the government’s World War I policies. Debs said, “I would
oppose war if I stood alone.” Further, he argued that the war benefited wealthy
capitalists while harming everyone else. Holmes concluded that Debs’s words
“had as their natural tendency and reasonable probable effect to obstruct the
[military] recruitment service.” But Holmes did not seem to care that no direct
causal connection could be made between Debs’ theoretical expressions of socialist ideology and behavior that might practically obstruct the government’s
military operations. Because the “bad tendency” test did not require evidence of
a direct link between particular speech and unlawful behavior, prosecutors and
judges used it to facilely and unsubstantially impose rather strict limitations on
First Amendment freedoms.
Leading legal scholars and commentators who had praised Holmes for his
promising new “clear and present danger” doctrine in Schenck criticized him
and the Supreme Court for eschewing it in the Frohwerk and Debs decisions.
For example, Harvard professor Zechariah Chafee wrote in the June 1919 issue
of the Harvard Law Review that Holmes’s “clear and present danger” doctrine
had the potential through application and refinement in future cases to make
“the punishment of words for their bad tendency impossible.” Chafee was disappointed that Holmes and the Court relied only on the “bad tendency” test in
Frohwerk and Debs.
Ernst Freund, a law professor at the University of Chicago, wrote an article
for The New Republic to emphatically express disappointment in the Court’s
Debs opinion. Freund criticized Holmes’s opinion for the Court because it upheld Debs’s conviction merely on an assumption, but without hard evidence,
The Latitude and Limits of Free Speech 71
that his speech was somehow connected to the “bad tendency” of obstructing
the draft. Freund charged there was “nothing to show actual obstruction or an
attempt to interfere with any of the recruitment process.” Thus, those who had
used the “bad tendency” test against Debs had decided against him by merely
“guessing” about “the tendency and possible effect” of Debs’s speech. This
manner of decision making offered flimsy and whimsical protection, instead
of solid security, for the individual’s First Amendment rights. Freund urged the
Court to return to the “clear and present danger” doctrine so that it might be
improved and developed into a just test for determining the breadth and limits
of free speech.
Holmes heeded the critical responses of scholars to the Court’s March 1919
free speech decisions. For example, he read carefully what Zechariah Chafee
and Ernst Freund wrote in the Harvard Law Review and The New Republic, and
he met with Professor Chafee and other legal experts and scholars to discuss free
speech issues during the summer of 1919. In particular, Holmes paid close attention to Chafee’s advice about developing the “clear and present danger” doctrine
to establish more clearly the line between speech that is protected by the First
Amendment and that which is not. Chafee also urged Holmes to emphasize the
social and political importance of a broader scope for freedom of speech. Thus,
in November 1919, when the Supreme Court considered its next free speech
case, Abrams v. United States, Justice Holmes was prepared to think and write
anew about constitutional issues of freedom of speech.
The case of Jacob Abrams began with his arrest in New York City on August
23, 1918. Abrams and several friends had written, printed, and distributed copies of leaflets that severely criticized President Woodrow Wilson and the U.S.
government. The leaflets opposed Wilson’s decision to send a small American
military force to Russia during the civil war there, which followed the communist revolution of 1917. The Communists, led by Vladimir Lenin, were fighting
against anticommunist Russians and various foreign military forces to retain
control of the government. Abrams’s leaflets urged American workers to walk
off their jobs in protest against President Wilson and the U.S. government and
in support of the new communist government in Russia.
Abrams and his friends were arrested and convicted for violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918. They claimed, however, that
their First Amendment rights had been violated because both the Espionage and
Sedition Acts were unconstitutional infringements of free speech. By a vote of
7–2, the Court upheld the conviction of Abrams and his friends.
Writing for the Court, Justice John H. Clarke cited the Schenck decision
as precedent and invoked the “bad tendency” test to support the ruling against
Abrams. Justice Clarke wrote that “men must be held to have intended and to be
accountable for the effects which their acts were likely to produce.” In particular, Clarke used the “bad tendency” test to argue that if workers had followed the
call of Abrams’s leaflets to walk away from their jobs in a general strike, then
the production of munitions would have been interrupted, thereby impairing the
U.S. government’s ability to defend the country in wartime. Clarke’s opinion
ignored the fact that Abrams’s message did not influence workers, and there
was no strike in protest of American government policies. The mere possibility
of such a bad effect was sufficient, according to Justice Clarke, to justify strict
limitation of a person’s constitutional right to free speech.
Justice Holmes, joined by Justice Louis D. Brandeis, wrote a strong dissent,
in which he developed his “clear and present danger” doctrine as Zechariah
72 The Pursuit of Justice
Chafee and others had urged him to do. He completely repudiated the “bad
tendency” test and refined his “clear and present danger” doctrine to require an
immediate or “imminent” harmful effect as the only justification for restricting
the content of speech.
Holmes recognized that the government had the right to protect itself against
speech that immediately and directly threatened the security and safety of the
country and its people. He argued that the First Amendment protects the expression of all opinions “unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference
with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is
required to save the country.” Holmes emphasized that a “clear and present danger” sufficient to restrict free speech could not exist unless there was an impending lawless action connected directly to the words of a speaker or writer. Holmes
concluded that Abrams’s actions and intentions were not an imminent danger
sufficient to justify limitation of his constitutional right to free speech.
Justice Holmes concluded his dissent with a compelling theory of free
speech in a constitutional democracy. Arguing for a “free trade in ideas,” is the
theory of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment.”
The Court’s opinion in Abrams prevailed in the short run, but Holmes’s
dissent eventually influenced the Court. Today, it is recognized as the foundation for contemporary constitutional doctrine on the individual’s right to free
speech.
The fate of those victimized by the Espionage and Sedition Acts varied.
Most served their sentences, but Eugene Debs, a national celebrity of sorts, was
pardoned by President Warren G. Harding in 1921. Jacob Abrams and his associates were less fortunate. Upon completion of their prison sentences, they
were deported, at their own expense, to Soviet Russia. However, the land they
had imagined as a “paradise for workers” turned out to be more like hell for
them. They had little latitude for freedom of expression or any other kind of civil
liberty under the totalitarian regime of the Soviet Union, which also eventually
deported them.
From 1919 until his retirement from the Court in 1932, Justice Holmes continued to argue for the refined version of the “clear and present danger” doctrine
expressed in his Abrams dissent. However, the Court did not use this doctrine
to uphold a freedom of speech claim until 1937, in Herndon v. Lowry, when by
a narrow vote of 5–4 the free speech rights of an American Communist Party
member were protected. In the 1969 case Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Court again
applied the ideas about free speech first expressed by Holmes in the 1919 Abrams
case. The Court unanimously upheld the free speech rights of a Ku Klux Klan
leader and struck down a state of Ohio law restricting speech that had a tendency
to cause public harm. Free speech rights had become broad enough to protect
even a despicable racist message, which was constitutionally permissible unless
it could be demonstrably and immediately linked to lawless behavior.
Based on everything we know about Holmes, it is certain that he would
have rejected the contemptible racist speech of a Ku Klux Klan leader, but he
would have hailed the latitude for civil liberty afforded even such a person.
Holmes, at the peak of his legal career, came to believe that the best way to
fight a flawed message was to refute it with superior ideas in a constitutionally
protected public arena of free-flowing opinion. And it seems beyond doubt that
Holmes would have been pleased that his dissent in the 1919 Abrams case was
the foundation of the Court’s 1969 opinion in Brandenburg. Today’s constitutional law broadly protecting free speech can be linked to the fertile mind of
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
The Latitude and Limits of Free Speech 73
“Free Trade in Ideas”
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. is among the most remarkable people ever to serve on the
Supreme Court. A heroic medal-winning soldier in the U.S. Army, three times wounded
during the Civil War, he served as a highly respected associate justice of the Supreme Court
from 1902 until his retirement in 1932. Born in 1841 in Boston, Massachusetts, Holmes
died in 1935 in Washington, D.C., and was buried with other military veterans in the national cemetery at Arlington, Virginia.
Holmes was an avid reader of books about literature and philosophy and had a keen
intellect and a memorable style of speaking and writing. Many of his Supreme Court opinions, both for the Court and in dissent, are exemplars of a literary style that both informs
and inspires the reader. In his later years on the Court, Holmes became known as a champion of the constitutional right to free speech, and he wrote many quotable phrases about
it in dissents against the Court’s majority, such as this one in United States v. Schwimmer
(1929): “If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought— not free thought for those who
agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.”
Many experts in constitutional law consider Holmes’s dissent, below, in Abrams v.
United States to be the best legal defense of free speech ever written by an American. A
sterling example of profound constitutional thought and eloquent literary style, Holmes’s
dissent in Abrams set a constitutional standard that eventually won enduring endorsement
from the Supreme Court.
I never have seen any reason to doubt that the
questions of law that alone were before this Court
in the cases of Schenck, Froherk and Debs . . . were
rightly decided. I do not doubt for a moment that
by the same reasoning that would justify punishing
persuasion to murder, the United States constitutionally may punish speech that produces or is intended
to produce a clear and imminent danger that it will
bring about forthwith certain substantive evils that
the United States constitutionally may seek to prevent. The power undoubtedly is greater in time of
war than in time of peace because war opens dangers
that do not exist at other times.
But as against dangers peculiar to war, as against
others, the principle of the right to free speech is always the same. It is only the present danger of immediate evil or an intent to bring it about that warrants Congress in setting a limit to the expression
of gress certainly cannot forbid all effort to change
the mind of the country. Now nobody can suppose
that the surreptitious publishing of a silly leaflet by
an unknown man, without more, would present any
immediate danger that its opinions would hinder the
74 The Pursuit of Justice
success of the government arms or have any appreciable tendency to do so. Publishing those opinions
for the very purpose of obstructing however, might
indicate a greater danger and at any rate would have
the quality of an attempt.... But it seems pretty clear
to me that nothing less than that would bring these
papers within the scope of the law....
I do not see how anyone can find the intent
required by the statute in any of the defendants’
words....
Persecution for the expression of opinions seems
to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your
premises or your power and want a certain result
with all your heart you naturally express your wishes
in law and sweep away all opposition. To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you think
the speech impotent. As when a man says that he has
squared the circle, or that you do not care wholeheartedly for the result, or that you doubt either your
power or your premises. But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they
may come to believe even more than they believe the
very foundations of their own conduct that the ulti-
mate good desired is better reached by free trade in
ideas—that the best test of truth is the power of the
thought to get itself accepted in the competition of
the market, and that truth is the only ground upon
which their wishes safely can be carried out. That
at any rate is the theory of our Constitution. It is an
experiment, as all life is an experiment. Every year
if not every day we have to wager our salvation upon
some prophecy based upon imperfect knowledge.
While that experiment is part of our system I think
that we should be eternally vigilant against attempts
to check the expression or opinions that we loathe
and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so
imminently threaten immediate interference with the
lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an im-
mediate check is required to save the country....Only
the emergency that makes it immediately dangerous
to leave the correction of evil counsels to time warrants making any exception to the sweeping command, “Congress shall make no law. . . abridging the
freedom of speech.” Of course I am speaking only
of expressions of opinion and exhor-tations, which
were all that were uttered here, but I regret that I cannot put into more impressive words my belief that in
their conviction upon this indictment the defendants
were deprived of their rights under the Constitution
of the United States.
Mr. Justice Brandeis concurs with the foregoing
opinion.
The Latitude and Limits of Free Speech 75
Source: http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/CivilLibertiesinWartime.pdf
Civil Liberties in Wartime TIMELINE
Alien and Sedition Acts
Become Law
Lincoln Suspends Writ of
Habeas Corpus
Hundreds Convicted Under
Espionage and Sedition Acts
1798
1861
1917
The U.S. is on the brink of war with France. The
Federalists believe criticism of their policies is disloyal and fear that immigrants are sympathetic to the
French. As a result, the Federalist-controlled Congress passes laws that raise the residency requirement for citizenship from 5 to 14 years, authorize
the president to deport aliens, and permit their arrest,
imprisonment, and deportation during wartime. The
Sedition Act makes it a crime for citizens to “print,
utter, or publish . . . any false, scandalous, and malicious writing” about the government.
Citing the threat posed by
Confederate spies, President
Abraham Lincoln suspends
the writ of habeas corpus in
Maryland, which allows suspected spies to be held indefinitely. (Habeas corpus is the
right to challenge a prisoner’s
detention.) Supreme Court
Chief Justice Roger Taney
condemns the suspension as
unconstitutional, but the next
year, Lincoln suspends habeas corpus for all states. The
Supreme Court later rules the
Constitution permits only
Congress to suspend habeas
corpus (Article 1, Section 9),
but Lincoln ignores it.
Portrait of
Abraham
Lincoln
Photo: Wikimedia
Commons
‘Clear and Present Danger’
Exception in Wartime
Palmer Raids Result
in ACLU Creation
1919
1920
In Schenck v. United States,
the Supreme Court upholds the
conviction of Socialist Charles
Schenck for conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to distribute antiwar
leaflets to U.S. servicemen.
While acknowledging that the
First Amendment normally
might protect Schenck’s activities, the court holds that in
special circumstances, such as
wartime, speech that poses a
“clear and present danger” can
be restricted.
After U.S. entry into World War I, the Espionage Act
targets those who refuse to serve in the military during
a draft, cause others to refuse their service, or reveal information about the national defense. Penalties include
a jail term of up to 20 years and fines up to $10,000.
A year later, the Sedition Act imposes severe criminal
penalties on all forms of expression critical of the government or its war mobilization. About 900 people are
convicted, and hundreds of noncitizens are deported
without a trial. When Socialist Party leader Eugene V.
Debs gives a speech criticizing the draft and praising
efforts to obstruct war recruitment, he is convicted and
sentenced to 10 years in prison.
After World War I ends, labor unrest makes the nation uneasy. The Russian
Revolution in 1917 sparked fears of a worker revolution, and a “Red Scare”
sweeps the nation. Dozens of mail bombs are sent to political leaders, and an
anarchist blows himself up outside the home of Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer. Fearing a communist takeover, Palmer creates the General Intelligence Division and recruits
J. Edgar Hoover as its
leader. Over two months,
Palmer arrests thousands
of suspected communists,
Socialists and other radicals in raids. Many are held
without trial; others are
deported. In response, the
American Civil Liberties
Union is founded and publishes a report critical of the
raids and similar government activities.
Three battleships hit from the air during the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Eugene Debs while in
prison at the Atlanta
Federal Penitentiary
for opposing WWI.
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
‘A Date Which Will
Live in Infamy’
Dec. 7, 1941
Japanese planes attack the
U.S. military base at Pearl
Harbor, Hawaii, killing
more than 2,000 Americans. The next day, President Franklin D. Roosevelt
delivers a speech to Congress seeking a declaration
of war. Soon after, the federal government initiates
curfews for Japanese, German and Italian Americans,
and hundreds of Japanese
nationals are arrested.
Civil Liberties in Wartime TIMELINE
Japanese Internment Camps
Authorized
Restrictions on Japanese
Americans Upheld
Hollywood Scrutinized for
Communist Ties
1942
1943
1947
Citing national security, President Franklin D. Roosevelt
issues two executive orders (quickly passed into law by
Congress) that authorize the internment of people of Japanese descent, including many U.S. citizens. One order
designates “military areas” across eight states from the
Canadian to the Mexican borders in which they are not
allowed to live. The other order authorizes their relocation to internment camps. More than 120,000 are forced
to give up their homes and businesses.
In Hirabayashi v. United
States, the Supreme Court
says a federal law that requires Japanese Americans
to live in restricted areas
and obey curfews does not
violate their Fifth Amendment right to due process.
The court addresses only
the curfew, which it calls
a necessary “protective
measure.” In Korematsu v.
United States, the court says
post-Pearl Harbor restrictive measures are justified
in times of “emergency and
peril.” Justice Frank Murphy, one of three dissenters,
describes the internment order as the “legalization of
racism.”
As the Cold War gets under way, the House UnAmerican Activities Committee investigates communist involvement in various professions. At hearings,
ten witnesses who refuse to answer questions, citing
the Fifth Amendment, are found guilty of contempt
of Congress and sentenced to prison. In 1951-54,
Sen. Joseph McCarthy leads a new round of hearings
investigating the entertainment industry. Hundreds
are subpoenaed and asked to “name names” of communist sympathizers. Those who refuse to testify are
“blacklisted” and denied work. After unedited footage of the hearings becomes public, the committee
comes under fire. In 1954, the Senate censures McCarthy for conduct unbecoming to a senator.
Senator
Joseph
McCarthy
Photo:Library
of Congress
San Francisco store closed when the JapaneseAmerican owner was required to relocate to an
internment camp.
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Limits Placed on Symbolic
Speech Right
1965
In United States v. O’Brien, the Supreme Court lets stand the conviction of an activist who burned his
draft card to protest the Vietnam
War. While the court admits that the
law against destroying a draft card
does limit free speech, it says the law
serves an important government interest (i.e., operation of the draft during
wartime).
Vietnam
War draft
card
Photo:
Wikimedia
Commons
Newspapers Win Pentagon
Papers Case
1971
After Attack, ‘War on
Terror’ Declared
The New York Times and the Washington Post obtain secret Defense Department
documents that detail U.S. involvement in
Vietnam in the years leading up to the war.
Citing national security, the U.S. government gets temporary restraining orders to
halt publication of the Pentagon Papers. But
the Supreme Court finds that prior restraint
on the documents’ publication violates the
First Amendment.
Terrorists associated with the al-Qaeda network hijack
four airplanes, crashing one into the Pentagon and two into
the World Trade Center in New York City. A fourth plane
crashes in a field in central Pennsylvania. All told, more
than 2,700 are killed. In the aftermath, President George
W. Bush declares a “war on terror.” Federal agents detain
more than 1,200 people, most of whom are held on visa
or other immigration violations and are not charged on
terrorism-related offenses.
Sept. 11, 2001
The Pentagon on
September 11, 2001
Photo:Library of Congress
Civil Liberties in Wartime TIMELINE
Broad Antiterrorism
Bill Is Passed
Bush Approves
Military Tribunals
Government Clash
Over Detainees
October 2001
November 2001
2004-2008
Congress swiftly passes the U.S.A. Patriot Act “to
enable capture of the individuals responsible for the
9/11 attacks, and to prevent future attacks.” Among
its provisions is a dramatic expansion of the federal
government’s authority to monitor suspected terrorists’ communications and to obtain online records,
such as organization membership lists and individuals’ purchases.
President George W. Bush signs a
military order that authorizes the
government to detain noncitizens
suspected of terrorism and to try
them before military tribunals.
The order states that as a result of
the 9/11 attacks, an “extraordinary
emergency exists for national defense purposes,” and that the detentions and tribunals are needed
to protect the U.S. Civil liberties
groups fear that the accused may
be held indefinitely without a trial
and that any trials could be held in
secret.
The Supreme Court rebuffs several Bush policies
on suspected terrorists. In Rasul v. Bush, it decides
that federal courts have jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions filed by foreign detainees at
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. After Congress responds
by passing the Military Commissions Act to remove jurisdiction, the court strikes down the act
as unconstitutional. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the
court says suspects designated as “enemy combatants” by the executive branch cannot be denied their due process rights, such as access to a
lawyer. In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld in 2006, the court
invalidates military tribunals set up by the Bush
administration to try detainees.
George W. Bush signs the Patriot Act
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
A detainee is escorted into a
medium security facility at
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Source: http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/understanding-democracy-a-hip-pocket-guide
16
| Accountability
Accountability
Accountability means that the government in a democracy
is responsible to the people for its actions. This responsibility is
primarily ensured by periodic public elections through which the
people choose their representatives in government. If those elected to represent the people are insufficiently responsive to them,
they are likely to be rejected at the next election and replaced by
others who promise greater accountability.
Both elected and appointed officials in government are held
accountable to the people by laws that regulate their actions.
These laws limit the government’s use of power in order to
protect the people from abuse. There also are laws that require
transparency or openness in government so that the people may
readily have information necessary to evaluate the performance
of their elected and appointed officials.
The mass media of communication, such as newspapers, television, radio, and websites, provide the public with information
about the performance of government. Laws that protect freedom
of speech and of the press are therefore foundations of accountability in a democracy. In particular, the mass media regularly
conduct public opinion polls to measure the people’s approval
or disapproval of particular representatives or of the government
in general. Thus, independent and privately owned media outlets
provide the people and their representatives with information that
prompts accountability by the government to the governed.
Some democratic governments, such as those in Sweden,
Lithuania, and Estonia, include the office of ombudsman, an
appointed official who responds directly to individuals with a
grievance against the government and who is empowered to seek
resolutions of complaints. Most democracies also include agencies that regularly conduct evaluations of the performances of
different parts of the government and communicate their findings
to the public.
Civil Society; Elections; Independent Media; Popular
Sovereignty
SEE ALSO
Authority | 17
Authority
Authority is the legitimate use of power by rulers over the
individuals they rule. It is a government’s justification for exercising power over the people within its jurisdiction. The people
are willing to accept the power of rulers to command them, if
they perceive that this power has been acquired and used rightfully or legitimately. When rulers have authority to use power
through government, the consequence is political order and stability among the people. When rulers use power without authority, they may be resisted by the ruled, leading either to oppression
by rulers over the ruled or to disorder and instability.
In a democracy, the source of authority or legitimacy for
government is the consent of the people, who believe that their
rulers have the right to exercise certain powers over them. This
legitimacy of government in a democracy is based on the people’s election of representatives in the government. If the people
believe their rulers have been elected fairly, then they are likely
to accept their authority and consent to the government that they
control. All the power of military and police forces in a democracy is under the control of civilian authorities accountable to the
people at large.
Authority in a democracy, which is based on consent of the
people, is distinct from authoritarianism. An authoritarian government exercises power on other grounds of legitimacy. For
example, authoritarian justifications for legitimacy to rule have
been aristocratic birth or the sanction of a Supreme Being (which
is commonly known as the divine right to rule). In an authoritarian government, the military and police are commanded by rulers
who are not directly accountable to the people they rule.
SEE ALSO
Elections; Popular Sovereignty
18
| Citizen
Citizen
A citizen is a full and equal member of a political community,
such as a country or nation-state. Such membership is a necessary
condition for the establishment and maintenance of a democracy.
The citizens are ‘‘the people’’ to whom a democratic government
is accountable. In most countries, the status of a natural citizen
is derived primarily or even exclusively from one’s parents; if
the parents are citizens, then their children automatically become
citizens, too. If one does not have a birthright to citizenship,
either through one’s parents or place or birth, there usually are
legal procedures by which a person can become a naturalized
citizen of a country. A country’s constitution and the laws based
on it specify the means for obtaining the status of citizen. For example, the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution says, ‘‘All
persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of
the State wherein they reside.’’
In a democracy, all citizens, both natural and naturalized, are
equal before the law. For example, the constitution of Italy says,
‘‘All citizens have the same social dignity and are equal before
the law, without discrimination of sex, race, language, religion,
political opinion, and personal or social conditions.’’ In a constitutional democracy, all citizens have the same fundamental
rights, duties, and responsibilities.
All citizens have a common civic identity based on their freely given consent to basic principles and values of their country’s
constitutional democracy. In countries with great religious, racial, or ethnic diversity, a common civic identity among all citizens is the tie that binds them together under their constitutional
and democratic government.
A passport is evidence of a person’s status as a citizen of a
particular nation. A citizen of one country usually needs a passport to enter and depart legally from another country.
Citizenship; Government, Constitutional and Limited;
Popular Sovereignty; State
SEE ALSO
Citizenship | 19
Citizenship
Citizenship is the legal relationship between citizens and
their government and country. Citizens owe their government
loyalty, support, and service. The government owes the citizens
the protection of constitutionally guaranteed rights to life, liberty,
property, and equal justice under law.
The rights of citizenship are set forth in the constitution of
a democratic government, which may distinguish between the
rights of citizens and noncitizens within the country. For example, in the United States, only citizens have the right to vote,
serve on juries, and be elected to certain offices of the government, and only a natural-born citizen can become President. All
other constitutional rights are guaranteed to citizens and noncitizens alike.
Citizenship in a democracy entails serious responsibilities.
For example, good citizens in a democracy exhibit civic engagement, which means they are ready, willing, and able to use their
constitutionally protected political rights to advance the common
good. Citizens are expected to be loyal and patriotic, to assume
responsibility for the defense of their country against internal and
external threats or attacks. Citizenship also entails certain duties,
such as paying taxes, serving on juries when summoned, joining
the country’s armed forces if drafted, and obeying the laws.
In the world today, citizenship is the fundamental condition
that connects individuals to the protective institutions of a democratic government and provides the means through which they
can participate politically and civically in their governance. The
rights, responsibilities, and duties of citizenship in a democracy
have practical meaning today only within a particular kind of political order, a constitutional democracy. Only within the authority of a democratically governed country are there dependable institutional means to enforce constitutional guarantees of rights.
SEE ALSO Citizen; Civil Society; Government, Constitutional and
Limited; State
20
| Civic Education
Civic Education
A democracy depends upon the competent participation of
its citizens in government and civil society. This can only happen when the people are educated for citizenship in a democracy.
Therefore, all democratic countries provide formal and informal
opportunities for civic education, or teaching and learning about
citizenship. Formal civic education is carried out through the curriculum of schools, and informal civic education occurs through
the interaction of individuals in various societal organizations.
Civic education is teaching the knowledge, skills, and virtues
needed for competent citizenship in a democracy. Unlike despotic forms of government, in which the people are merely passive receivers of orders from their rulers, democracy involves a
significant measure of independent thinking and popular decision
making. A democracy cannot be maintained unless the citizens
are educated sufficiently to carry out certain duties and responsibilities of a self-governing people, such as voting intelligently,
communicating effectively about public issues, cooperating with
others to solve common problems, and making judgments about
the performance of their government.
Wherever in the world democracy exists, schools are expected to prepare students for citizenship through civic education.
The society outside the school also provides lifelong opportunities for civic education through the mass media and by participation in community service organizations and political parties.
The primary component of civic education is imparting the
knowledge needed for citizens’ informed participation in their
democracy. Informed citizens have basic knowledge of such subjects as history, economics, geography, and government or political science. They comprehend core concepts of democracy, the
constitution and institutions of democracy in their own country,
and public issues in the past and present pertaining to the practice
of democracy.
Civic Education | 21
A second component of civic education is developing the
intellectual and practical skills that enable citizens to use knowledge effectively as they act individually and collectively in the
public life of their democracy. These skills include the capacities
of citizens to read, write, and speak effectively; to think critically;
and to make and defend sound judgments about public issues.
Skills of thinking and participating, in combination with civic
knowledge, enable citizens with common interests to influence
the decisions of their representatives in government.
A third component of civic education is encouraging the virtues that dispose citizens positively to the ideals and principles
of their democracy. Examples of these civic virtues are civility,
honesty, charity, compassion, courage, loyalty, patriotism, and
self-restraint. These character traits prompt citizens to contribute
to the well-being of their community and democracy.
Civic education is needed to maintain democracy, because
citizens fit for self-government are made, not born. The preservation of democracy in any country requires that each generation
of the people learn what their democracy is, how to participate
responsibly and effectively in it, and why they should try to keep
and improve it.
SEE ALSO
Citizen; Civil Society; Participation; Virtue, Civic
28
| Constitutionalism
Constitutionalism
Constitutionalism is a way of thinking about the relationshipbetween the rulers and the ruled in a community. It combines two
concepts, limited government and the rule of law, that permeate the constitution, a country’s framework for government. The
constitution in an authentic democracy both grants powers to the
government and controls or harnesses them in order to protect the
rights of the people.
Limited government means that officials cannot act arbitrarily when they make and enforce laws and enact other public
decisions. Government officials cannot simply do as they please.
Rather, they are guided and limited by the constitution of their
country and the laws made in conformity with it as they carry out
the duties of their public offices.
The rule of law means that neither government officials nor
common citizens are allowed to violate the supreme law of the
land, the constitution, or the laws enacted in accordance with it.
People accused of crimes are treated equally under the law and
given due process—that is, fair and proper legal proceedings—in
all official actions against them. Under the rule of law, everyone
in the community—public officials and private citizens, from the
highest to the lowest ranks—must conform to the constitution.
In every democracy today, limited government and the rule
of law are embedded in the constitution. For example, the 1976
constitution of Portugal says:
1. Sovereignty, one and indivisible, rests with the
people, who shall exercise it in accordance with the
forms laid down in the constitution.
2. The state shall be subject to the constitution and
based on democratic legality.
3. The validity of the laws and other acts of the
state, the autonomous regions or local authorities
shall depend on their being in accordance with the
constitution.
Constitutionalism | 29
A turning point in the history of constitutionalism occurred
in 1787–88, when the U.S. Constitution was drafted and ratified.
The Preamble stated the purposes of the constitutional government:
We the people of the United States, in Order to
form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure
the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for
the United States of America.
In order to carry out its purposes in the Preamble, the government under this constitution was sufficiently empowered to
protect the people. And the constitutional government was sufficiently limited so that the government would not be able to turn
its power unjustly against the people. Thus, this simultaneously
strong and limited government would ‘‘secure the Blessings of
Liberty’’ to the people.
Article 6 of the Constitution states the principle of constitutional supremacy that guarantees limited government and the
rule of law: ‘‘The Constitution and the Laws of the United States
which shall be made in Pursuance thereof . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land.’’ All laws enacted by any government
in the United States must conform to the Constitution. As AlexanderHamilton explained in the 78th paper of The Federalist,
‘‘No legislative act contrary to the Constitution, therefore, can be
valid.’’ Moreover, any government action that violates the Constitution can be declared unconstitutional and voided by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
In 1787–88, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison claimed
in The Federalist that limited government and the rule of law—
principles essential to the U.S. Constitution—would guard the
people from tyranny or unjust encroachments against their right
to liberty. They feared equally any kind of unrestrained exercise
of power. To them, the power of an insufficiently limited majority
of the peoplewas just as dangerous as the unlimited power of a
king or military dictator.
30
| Constitutionalism
Hamilton and Madison held that the best government is both
constitutionally empowered and limited; it is ‘‘energetic’’—
strong enough to act decisively and effectively for the common
good—and ‘‘limited by law’’ in order to protect the inherent rights
of individuals. These principles of constitutionalism expressed
by Americans in the late 18th century have become guides to the
establishment of constitutional governments in many democracies of the world.
SEE ALSO Constitution; Democracy, Representative and Constitu-
tional; Government, Constitutional and Limited
Democracy, Representative . . . | 31
Democracy, Representative
and Constitutional
Democracy in the governments of countries today is representative, meaning that the people rule indirectly through their
elected public officials. Democracy today is also constitutional,
meaning that government by the people’s representatives is both
limited and empowered to protect equally and justly the rights of
everyone in the country.
Representatives elected by the people try to serve the interest
of their constituents within the framework of a constitutionally
limited government. The constitution ensures both majority rule
and minority rights.
The U.S. government is a prime example of representative
and constitutional democracy. It is a representative democracy
because the people, the source of its authority, elect individuals
to represent their interests in its institutions. The formation and
function of the government is based on majority rule. The people,
for example, elect their representatives by majority vote in free,
fair, competitive, and periodic elections in which practically all
adult citizens of the country have the right to vote. Further, the
people’s representatives in Congress make laws by majority vote.
A chief executive, the President, elected by the people, then enforces these laws.
Representative democracy in the United States is constitutional because it is both limited and empowered by the supreme
law, the Constitution, for the ultimate purpose of protecting
equally the rights of all the people. The periodic election by the
people of their representatives in government is conducted according to the Constitution and the laws made under it. The votes
of the majority decide the winners of the election, but the rights
of the minority are constitutionally protected so that they can
freely criticize the majority of the moment and attempt to replace
their representatives in the next election. From time to time, there
is a lawful and orderly transition of power from one group of
leaders to another. Legitimate legal limitations on the people’s
government make the United States a constitutional democracy,
32
| Democracy, Representative . . .
the United States a constitutional democracy, not an unlimited
democracy in which the tyranny of the majority against political
minorities could persist without effective challenges.
In earlier autocratic governments, the unrestrained power of
a king or an aristocracy had typically threatened liberty. However, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and other framers of the
U.S. Constitution feared that a tyrannical majority of the people
could pose a new challenge to liberty. Madison expressed his fear
of majority tyranny in an October 17, 1788, letter to Thomas Jefferson:
Wherever the real power in a Government lies,
there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments, the real power lies in the majority of the
Community, and the invasion of private rights is
chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents,
but from acts in which the Government is the mere
instrument of the major number of the constituents.
This is a truth of great importance, but not yet sufficiently attended to. . . .Whenever there is an interest and power to do wrong, wrong will generally
be done, and not less readily by [a majority of the
people] than by a . . . prince.
Madison foresaw that in a representative democracy a threat
to individual’s liberty could come from an unrestrained majority.
Unless they are effectively limited by a well-constructed constitution, which the people observe faithfully, the winners of a
democratic election could persecute the losers and prevent them
from competing for control of the government in a future election. This kind of danger to liberty and justice can be overcome
by constructing and enforcing constitutional limits on majority
rule in order to protect minority rights.
Constitution; Constitutionalism; Elections; Government, Constitutional and Limited; Rights; State
SEE ALSO
44
| Independent Media
Independent Media
In a constitutional democracy, the mass media—newspapers,
magazines, radio and television stations, and websites—are for
the most part privately owned, independent, and free of government control. They are among the nongovernmental organizations of civil society, and they are free to transmit information
and ideas about government and public affairs to the people.
Therefore, they can criticize government officials and offer alternative opinions about current events and issues. By contrast,
nondemocratic governments restrict the mass media in order to
communicate only information that is supportive of public officials. In communist regimes, such as the defunct Soviet Union,
the government owned and operated all mass media in order to
indoctrinate the people and maintain control over them.
One function of the mass media in a democracy is to inform
people about current events and introduce them to a variety of
opinions about public issues. They thus enable the people to participate intelligently and responsibly in civic and political affairs.
A second function is to criticize the government and expose the
performance of public officials to public scrutiny, making the
government accountable to the people it represents. Mistakes by
government officials are more likely to be corrected, and government is more likely to be a responsible servant of the people than
in countries with state-controlled media.
The mass media in a constitutional democracy have the right
to freedom of expression. The government cannot, for example,
restrain in advance what a newspaper may print. However,
citizens may as consumers choose to reject or ignore particular
newspapers or other media sources. Thus, there is a free market
place of ideas in which citizens and communicators interact to
exchange opinions about how to improve their democracy.
Accountability; Citizenship; Civil Society; Constitutionalism; Rights
SEE ALSO
56
| Liberty
Liberty
A person who has liberty is free to make choices about what
to do or what to say. A primary purpose of government in the
United States and other constitutional democracies is to protect
and promote the liberty of individuals. The Preamble to the U.S.
Constitution proclaims that a principal reason for establishing
the federal government is to ‘‘secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity.’’ The Preamble to the 1992 Czech
constitution also stresses liberty: ‘‘We, the citizens of the Czech
Republic . . . in the spirit of the inviolable values of human dignity and liberty, as a homeland of equal, free, citizens . . . hereby
adopt, through our freely elected representatives, the following
Constitution of the Czech Republic.’’
The U.S. Constitution, the Czech constitution, and the constitutions of other democracies throughout the world include
guarantees for the protection of fundamental civil liberties, such
as freedom of speech and press, freedom of assembly and association, freedom to vote and otherwise participate in elections
of representatives in government, freedom of conscience, free
exercise of religion, and freedom from unwarranted invasions of
one’s home or other private spaces in society. These freedoms are
called civil liberties because individuals enjoy them only within
the context of civil society and constitutional government.
Civil liberty in a constitutional democracy means liberty
under laws enacted by the elected representatives of the people.
Rights to civil liberty are exercised, constrained, and protected
by laws made through the free and fair procedures of democracy. Liberty is secured by limiting the power of government to
prevent it from abusing the people’s rights. But if the government has too little power, so that law and order break down, then
liberties may be lost. Neither freedom of thought nor freedom of
action is secure in a lawless and disorderly society.
Ordered liberty is the desirable condition in which both public order and personal liberty are maintained. But how can liberty
and authority, freedom and power, be combined and balanced
so that one does not predominate over the other? This was the
basic problem of constitutional government that concerned the
Liberty | 57
founders of the United States, and it has continued to challenge
Americans as democracy has evolved and expanded throughout
the history of their country. Early on, James Madison noted the
challenges of ordered liberty in a 1788 letter to Thomas Jefferson: ‘‘It is a melancholy reflection that liberty should be equally
exposed to danger whether the Government has too much or
too little power; and that the line which divides these extremes
should be so inaccurately defined by experience.’’
Madison noted the standing threat to liberty posed by insufficient constitutional limits on government. He also recognized
that liberty carried to the extreme, as in a riot, is equally dangerous to the freedom and other rights of individuals. Constitutional
democracy may provide both liberty and order, but the right mix
of these two factors can be difficult to find and maintain.
There are two continuously challenging questions about liberty and order that every democracy must confront and resolve.
First, at what point, and under what conditions, should the power
of government be limited in order to protect individuals’ rights
to liberty against the threat of despotism? Second, at what point,
and under what conditions, should expressions of individual
liberty be limited by law in order to maintain public order and
stability and to prevent the demise of constitutional democracy?
Every country that strives to achieve or maintain democracy must
resolve these questions about liberty and order.
Constitutionalism; Democracy, Representative and
Constitutional; Liberalism; Rights
SEE ALSO
(rev. 02/16)
Civics (History and Government) Questions for the Naturalization Test
The 100 civics (history and government) questions and answers for the naturalization test are listed below. The civics test
is an oral test and the USCIS Officer will ask the applicant up to 10 of the 100 civics questions. An applicant must answer
6 out of 10 questions correctly to pass the civics portion of the naturalization test.
On the naturalization test, some answers may change because of elections or appointments. As you study for the test,
make sure that you know the most current answers to these questions. Answer these questions with the name of the official
who is serving at the time of your eligibility interview with USCIS. The USCIS Officer will not accept an incorrect
answer.
Although USCIS is aware that there may be additional correct answers to the 100 civics questions, applicants are
encouraged to respond to the civics questions using the answers provided below.
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
A: Principles of American Democracy
1. What is the supreme law of the land?
▪ the Constitution
2. What does the Constitution do?
▪ sets up the government
▪ defines the government
▪ protects basic rights of Americans
3. The idea of self-government is in the first three words of the Constitution. What are these words?
▪ We the People
4. What is an amendment?
▪ a change (to the Constitution)
▪ an addition (to the Constitution)
5. What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution?
▪ the Bill of Rights
6.
What is one right or freedom from the First Amendment?*
▪ speech
▪ religion
▪ assembly
▪ press
▪ petition the government
7. How many amendments does the Constitution have?
▪ twenty-seven (27)
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-1-
www.uscis.gov
8.
What did the Declaration of Independence do?
▪ announced our independence (from Great Britain)
▪ declared our independence (from Great Britain)
▪ said that the United States is free (from Great Britain)
9.
What are two rights in the Declaration of Independence?
▪ life
▪ liberty
▪ pursuit of happiness
10. What is freedom of religion?
▪ You can practice any religion, or not practice a religion.
11. What is the economic system in the United States?*
▪ capitalist economy
▪ market economy
12.
What is the “rule of law”?
▪ Everyone must follow the law.
▪ Leaders must obey the law.
▪ Government must obey the law.
▪ No one is above the law.
B: System of Government
13.
Name one branch or part of the government.*
▪ Congress
▪ legislative
▪ President
▪ executive
▪ the courts
▪ judicial
14. What stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful?
▪ checks and balances
▪ separation of powers
15. Who is in charge of the executive branch?
▪ the President
16.
Who makes federal laws?
▪ Congress
▪ Senate and House (of Representatives)
▪ (U.S. or national) legislature
17.What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress?*
▪ the Senate and House (of Representatives)
18. How many U.S. Senators are there?
▪ one hundred (100)
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-2-
www.uscis.gov
19. We elect a U.S. Senator for how many years?
▪ six (6)
20. Who is one of your state’s U.S. Senators now?*
▪ Answers will vary. [District of Columbia residents and residents of U.S. territories should answer that D.C.
(or the territory where the applicant lives) has no U.S. Senators.]
21. The House of Representatives has how many voting members?
▪ four hundred thirty-five (435)
22. We elect a U.S. Representative for how many years?
▪ two (2)
23. Name your U.S. Representative.
▪ Answers will vary. [Residents of territories with nonvoting Delegates or Resident Commissioners may
provide the name of that Delegate or Commissioner. Also acceptable is any statement that the territory has
no (voting) Representatives in Congress.]
24. Who does a U.S. Senator represent?
▪ all people of the state
25.
Why do some states have more Representatives than other states?
▪ (because of) the state’s population
▪ (because) they have more people
▪ (because) some states have more people
26. We elect a President for how many years?
▪ four (4)
27. In what month do we vote for President?*
▪ November
28. What is the name of the President of the United States now?*
▪ Barack Obama
▪ Obama
29.
What is the name of the Vice President of the United States now?
▪ Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
▪ Joe Biden
▪ Biden
30. If the President can no longer serve, who becomes President?
▪ the Vice President
31. If both the President and the Vice President can no longer serve, who becomes President?
▪ the Speaker of the House
32. Who is the Commander in Chief of the military?
▪ the President
33. Who signs bills to become laws?
▪ the President
34. Who vetoes bills?
▪ the President
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-3-
www.uscis.gov
35. What does the President’s Cabinet do?
▪ advises the President
36.
What are two Cabinet-level positions?
▪ Secretary of Agriculture
▪ Secretary of Commerce
▪ Secretary of Defense
▪ Secretary of Education
▪ Secretary of Energy
▪ Secretary of Health and Human Services
▪ Secretary of Homeland Security
▪ Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
▪ Secretary of the Interior
▪ Secretary of Labor
▪ Secretary of State
▪ Secretary of Transportation
▪ Secretary of the Treasury
▪ Secretary of Veterans Affairs
▪ Attorney General
▪ Vice President
37.
What does the judicial branch do?
▪ reviews laws
▪ explains laws
▪ resolves disputes (disagreements)
▪ decides if a law goes against the Constitution
38. What is the highest court in the United States?
▪ the Supreme Court
39. How many justices are on the Supreme Court?
▪ nine (9)
40. Who is the Chief Justice of the United States now?
▪ John Roberts (John G. Roberts, Jr.)
41.Under our Constitution, some powers belong to the federal government. What is one power of the federal
government?
▪ to print money
▪ to declare war
▪ to create an army
▪ to make treaties
42.Under our Constitution, some powers belong to the states. What is one power of the states?
▪ provide schooling and education
▪ provide protection (police)
▪ provide safety (fire departments)
▪ give a driver’s license
▪ approve zoning and land use
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-4-
www.uscis.gov
43. Who is the Governor of your state now?
▪ Answers will vary. [District of Columbia residents should answer that D.C. does not have a Governor.]
44. What is the capital of your state?*
▪ Answers will vary. [District of Columbia residents should answer that D.C. is not a state and does not have a
capital. Residents of U.S. territories should name the capital of the territory.]
45. What are the two major political parties in the United States?*
▪ Democratic and Republican
46. What is the political party of the President now?
▪ Democratic (Party)
47. What is the name of the Speaker of the House of Representatives now?
▪ Paul D. Ryan
▪ (Paul) Ryan
C: Rights and Responsibilities
48.
There are four amendments to the Constitution about who can vote. Describe one of them.
▪ Citizens eighteen (18) and older (can vote).
▪ You don’t have to pay (a poll tax) to vote.
▪ Any citizen can vote. (Women and men can vote.)
▪ A male citizen of any race (can vote).
49. What is one responsibility that is only for United States citizens?*
▪ serve on a jury
▪ vote in a federal election
50. Name one right only for United States citizens.
▪ vote in a federal election
▪ run for federal office
51.
What are two rights of everyone living in the United States?
▪ freedom of expression
▪ freedom of speech
▪ freedom of assembly
▪ freedom to petition the government
▪ freedom of religion
▪ the right to bear arms
52. What do we show loyalty to when we say the Pledge of Allegiance?
▪ the United States
▪ the flag
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-5-
www.uscis.gov
53.
What is one promise you make when you become a United States citizen?
▪ give up loyalty to other countries
▪ defend the Constitution and laws of the United States
▪ obey the laws of the United States
▪ serve in the U.S. military (if needed)
▪ serve (do important work for) the nation (if needed)
▪ be loyal to the United States
54. How old do citizens have to be to vote for President?*
▪ eighteen (18) and older
55.
What are two ways that Americans can participate in their democracy?
▪ vote
▪ join a political party
▪ help with a campaign
▪ join a civic group
▪ join a community group
▪ give an elected official your opinion on an issue
▪ call Senators and Representatives
▪ publicly support or oppose an issue or policy
▪ run for office
▪ write to a newspaper
56. When is the last day you can send in federal income tax forms?*
▪ April 15
57. When must all men register for the Selective Service?
▪ at age eighteen (18)
▪ between eighteen (18) and twenty-six (26)
AMERICAN HISTORY
A: Colonial Period and Independence
58.
What is one reason colonists came to America?
▪ freedom
▪ political liberty
▪ religious freedom
▪ economic opportunity
▪ practice their religion
▪ escape persecution
59. Who lived in America before the Europeans arrived?
▪ American Indians
▪ Native Americans
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-6-
www.uscis.gov
60. What group of people was taken to America and sold as slaves?
▪ Africans
▪ people from Africa
61. Why did the colonists fight the British?
▪ because of high taxes (taxation without representation)
▪ because the British army stayed in their houses (boarding, quartering)
▪ because they didn’t have self-government
62. Who wrote the Declaration of Independence?
▪ (Thomas) Jefferson
63. When was the Declaration of Independence adopted?
▪ July 4, 1776
64.
There were 13 original states. Name three.
▪ New Hampshire
▪ Massachusetts
▪ Rhode Island
▪ Connecticut
▪ New York
▪ New Jersey
▪ Pennsylvania
▪ Delaware
▪ Maryland
▪ Virginia
▪ North Carolina
▪ South Carolina
▪ Georgia
65. What happened at the Constitutional Convention?
▪ The Constitution was written.
▪ The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution.
66. When was the Constitution written?
▪ 1787
67.
The Federalist Papers supported the passage of the U.S. Constitution. Name one of the writers.
▪ (James) Madison
▪ (Alexander) Hamilton
▪ (John) Jay
▪ Publius
68.
What is one thing Benjamin Franklin is famous for?
▪ U.S. diplomat
▪ oldest member of the Constitutional Convention
▪ first Postmaster General of the United States
▪ writer of “Poor Richard’s Almanac”
▪ started the first free libraries
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-7-
www.uscis.gov
69. Who is the “Father of Our Country”?
▪ (George) Washington
70. Who was the first President?*
▪ (George) Washington
B: 1800s
71. What territory did the United States buy from France in 1803?
▪ the Louisiana Territory
▪ Louisiana
72.
Name one war fought by the United States in the 1800s.
▪ War of 1812
▪ Mexican-American War
▪ Civil War
▪ Spanish-American War
73. Name the U.S. war between the North and the South.
▪ the Civil War
▪ the War between the States
74.
Name one problem that led to the Civil War.
▪ slavery
▪ economic reasons
▪ states’ rights
75.
What was one important thing that Abraham Lincoln did?*
▪ freed the slaves (Emancipation Proclamation)
▪ saved (or preserved) the Union
▪ led the United States during the Civil War
76.
What did the Emancipation Proclamation do?
▪ freed the slaves
▪ freed slaves in the Confederacy
▪ freed slaves in the Confederate states
▪ freed slaves in most Southern states
77. What did Susan B. Anthony do?
▪ fought for women’s rights
▪ fought for civil rights
C: Recent American History and Other Important Historical Information
78.
Name one war fought by the United States in the 1900s.*
▪ World War I
▪ World War II
▪ Korean War
▪ Vietnam War
▪ (Persian) Gulf War
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-8-
www.uscis.gov
79. Who was President during World War I?
▪ (Woodrow) Wilson
80. Who was President during the Great Depression and World War II?
▪ (Franklin) Roosevelt
81. Who did the United States fight in World War II?
▪ Japan, Germany, and Italy
82. Before he was President, Eisenhower was a general. What war was he in?
▪ World War II
83. During the Cold War, what was the main concern of the United States?
▪ Communism
84. What movement tried to end racial discrimination?
▪ civil rights (movement)
85. What did Martin Luther King, Jr. do?*
▪ fought for civil rights
▪ worked for equality for all Americans
86. What major event happened on September 11, 2001, in the United States?
▪ Terrorists attacked the United States.
87. Name one American Indian tribe in the United States.
[USCIS Officers will be supplied with a list of federally recognized American Indian tribes.]
▪ Cherokee
▪ Navajo
▪ Sioux
▪ Chippewa
▪ Choctaw
▪ Pueblo
▪ Apache
▪ Iroquois
▪ Creek
▪ Blackfeet
▪ Seminole
▪ Cheyenne
▪ Arawak
▪ Shawnee
▪ Mohegan
▪ Huron
▪ Oneida
▪ Lakota
▪ Crow
▪ Teton
▪ Hopi
▪ Inuit
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-9-
www.uscis.gov
INTEGRATED CIVICS
A: Geography
88. Name one of the two longest rivers in the United States.
▪ Missouri (River)
▪ Mississippi (River)
89. What ocean is on the West Coast of the United States?
▪ Pacific (Ocean)
90. What ocean is on the East Coast of the United States?
▪ Atlantic (Ocean)
91.
Name one U.S. territory.
▪ Puerto Rico
▪ U.S. Virgin Islands
▪ American Samoa
▪ Northern Mariana Islands
▪ Guam
92.
Name one state that borders Canada.
▪ Maine
▪ New Hampshire
▪ Vermont
▪ New York
▪ Pennsylvania
▪ Ohio
▪ Michigan
▪ Minnesota
▪ North Dakota
▪ Montana
▪ Idaho
▪ Washington
▪ Alaska
93.
Name one state that borders Mexico.
▪ California
▪ Arizona
▪ New Mexico
▪ Texas
94. What is the capital of the United States?*
▪ Washington, D.C.
95. Where is the Statue of Liberty?*
▪ New York (Harbor)
▪ Liberty Island
[Also acceptable are New Jersey, near New York City, and on the Hudson (River).]
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-10-
www.uscis.gov
B: Symbols
96. Why does the flag have 13 stripes?
▪ because there were 13 original colonies
▪ because the stripes represent the original colonies
97. Why does the flag have 50 stars?*
▪ because there is one star for each state
▪ because each star represents a state
▪ because there are 50 states
98. What is the name of the national anthem?
▪ The Star-Spangled Banner
C: Holidays
99. When do we celebrate Independence Day?*
▪ July 4
100.Name two national U.S. holidays.
▪ New Year’s Day
▪ Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
▪ Presidents’ Day
▪ Memorial Day
▪ Independence Day
▪ Labor Day
▪ Columbus Day
▪ Veterans Day
▪ Thanksgiving
▪ Christmas
* If you are 65 years old or older and have been a legal permanent resident of the United States for 20 or more years, you
may study just the questions that have been marked with an asterisk.
-11-
www.uscis.gov
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Standards
National Civics and Government Standards
National Standards for Civics and Government (1994) Center for Civic Education
Source: http://www.civiced.org/standards
•
Grades 5-8
•
Grades 9-12
Common Core State Standards
English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects
Source: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_ELA%20Standards.pdf
Grades 6-12 Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects
(Reading for Literacy in History/Social Studies and Writing)
•
Grades 6-8
•
Grades 10-11
•
Grades 11-12
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Source: National Standards for Civics and Government (1994) Center for Civic Education
http://www.civiced.org/index.php?page=stds
Grades 5-8 Content Standards Alignment
The following chart shows a more granular alignment at the standards level.
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Specific Content Standards
I.A.2. Necessity and purposes of government.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions on why government is necessary and the
purposes government should serve.
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
Government in a constitutional democracy is
responsible for protecting individual rights and
providing for national security.
I.B.1. Limited and unlimited governments. Students
should be able to explain the essential characteristics
of limited and unlimited governments.
Unlimited systems government concentrates political
power in one person, such as a king. A constitutional
government is characterized by legal limits on political
power.
Laws can be used to restrict the actions of private
citizens and government officials alike in order to
protect the rights of individuals and promote the
common good.
Time and experience leave their mark on a
constitution. The U.S. Constitution is a written
document that defines the government and makes it
responsible for protecting the rights of those under its
authority. The document and our understanding of it
have evolved over time.
The U.S. Constitution defines the structure and
function of the government. It also establishes the
relationship between the people and the government
I.B.2. The rule of law. Students should be able to
explain the importance of the rule of law for the
protection of individual rights and the common good.
I.C.1. Concepts of “constitution.” Students should be
able to explain different uses of the term
“constitution” and to distinguish between
governments with a constitution and a constitutional
government.
I.C.2. Purposes and uses of constitutions. Students
should be able to explain the various purposes
constitutions serve.
I.C.3. Conditions under which constitutional
government flourishes. Students should be able to
explain those conditions that are
essential for the flourishing of constitutional
government.
A constitutional government depends on an informed
and educated citizenry to serve as a check on the
government.
I. D.1. Shared and parliamentary systems. Students
should be able to describe the major characteristics of
systems of shared powers and of parliamentary
systems.
We have a three-branch system of government in
which power is shared by the executive, legislative and
judicial branches.
Page 1 of 4
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Specific Content Standards
II.A.1. The American idea of constitutional
government. Students should be able to explain the
essential ideas of American constitutional
government.
II.C.1. American identity. Students should be able to
explain the importance of shared political values and
principles to American society.
II.D.1. Fundamental values and principles. Students
should be able to explain the meaning and importance
of the fundamental values and principles of American
constitutional democracy.
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
The Constitution is the highest law in the land.
We have a three-branch system of government with
checks and balances to ensure that no one branch gets
too powerful. The government has limited powers in
order to protect the rights of individuals.
Key documents:
Declaration of Independence (1776)
Articles of Confederation (1781)
U.S. Constitution (1787)
Bill of Rights (1791)
Americans share the same values set forth in the First
Amendment such as the right to freedom of speech
and freedom of the press.
The following values and principles are fundamental to
American civic life:
• individual rights (majority and minority rights)
• justice
• self-government
• truth
Principles fundamental to American constitutional
democracy include:
• individual rights
• rule of law
• separated and shared powers
• checks and balances
III.A.1 Distributing, sharing, and limiting powers of
the national government. Students should be able to
explain how the powers of the national government
are distributed, shared, and limited.
The system of checks and balances in our government
prevents any one branch from becoming too powerful.
Executive branch: enforces the laws
President, Department of Defense
Legislative branch: makes the laws
Congress (Senate, House of Representatives)
Judicial branch: interprets the laws
Supreme Court and federal court system
III.E.1. The place of law in American society. Students
should be able to explain the importance of law in the
American constitutional system.
Courts make decisions based on the rule of law in
order to protect the rights of citizens and promote the
common good. Key cases in the lesson:
Supreme Court—Appellate Court
Abrams v. United States
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
New York Times v. United States
Schenck v. United States
Federal Court—Trial Court
United States v. Matthew Lyon
Page 2 of 4
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Specific Content Standards
III.E.3. Judicial protection of the rights of individuals.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions on current issues regarding judicial
protection of individual rights.
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
The Constitution ensures judicial fairness and
protection of individual rights to all under its
authority-- citizen and noncitizen. The courts are the
means of conflict resolution where individuals can
challenge the constitutionality of laws and appeal all
the way to the Supreme Court.
III.F.1. The public agenda. Students should be able to
explain what is meant by the public agenda and how it
is set.
The high-profile cases in the lesson made the news
and captured the attention and interest of the public.
By keeping the public informed, the press helped
shape public opinion.
III.F.2. Political communication. Students should be
able to evaluate, take, and defend positions on the
influence of the media on American political life.
An informed citizenry is a prerequisite for democracy,
and the press is the way citizens learn about their
government. The media has the power to shape
public opinion on issues.
V.A.1. The meaning of citizenship.
Only citizens have the right to vote. Citizens have the
responsibility to be informed about what their
government is doing. Citizens have rights under the
law.
V.A.2. Becoming a citizen. Students should be able to
evaluate, take, and defend positions
on issues regarding the criteria used for naturalization.
A knowledgeable citizenry is essential for protecting
democracy. Therefore, basic knowledge of civics
(history and government) is a requirement for those
seeking citizenship.
V.B.2. Political rights. Students should be able to
evaluate, take, and defend positions on issues
involving political rights.
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are
important political rights that allow individuals to
criticize the government without fear of punishment.
These rights are articulated in the First Amendment.
V.B.4 Scope and limits of rights.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions on issues regarding the proper scope and
limits of rights.
The scope and limit of rights related to freedom of
speech and the press are defined by principles
established through Supreme Court decisions and case
law. These criteria and considerations are noted
• Clear and present danger test
• National security
V.C.2. Civic responsibilities. Students should be able
to evaluate, take, and defend positions on the
importance of civic responsibilities to the individual
and society.
Informed citizens are able to monitor government
leaders and take appropriate action if they behave in
ways that are illegal, unconstitutional or
inappropriate.
Page 3 of 4
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Specific Content Standards
V.D.1. Dispositions that enhance citizen effectiveness
and promote the healthy functioning of American
constitutional democracy. Students should be able to
evaluate, take, and defend positions on the
importance of certain dispositions or traits of
character to themselves and American constitutional
democracy.
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
The following traits were evident in the citizens,
noncitizens, justices, president, and Congress
• persistence
• courage
• respect for the law
• tolerance of ambiguity
• honesty
• open-mindedness
V.E.1. Participation in civic and political life and the
attainment of individual and public goals. Students
should be able to explain the relationship between
participating in civic and political life and the
attainment of individual and public goals.
Participation in the judicial process is not only a way to
resolve current disputes, but also a way to affect the
way of life for others in the future.
V.E.5. Knowledge and participation.
Students should be able to explain the importance of
knowledge to competent and responsible
participation in American democracy.
A constitutional democracy requires the participation
of an attentive, knowledgeable and competent
citizenry. The people and the press are the last
defenders of liberty. Without them, government
power would go unchecked and there would be no
democracy.
Page 4 of 4
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Source: National Standards for Civics and Government (1994) Center for Civic Education
http://www.civiced.org/index.php?page=stds
Grades 9-12 Content Standards Alignment
The following chart shows a more granular alignment at the standards level.
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Specific Content Standards
I.A.3. The purposes of politics and government.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions on competing ideas regarding the purposes
of politics and government and their implications for
the individual and society.
I.B.1. Limited and unlimited governments. Students
should be able to explain the essential characteristics
of limited and unlimited governments.
I.B.2. The rule of law. Students should be able to
evaluate, take, and defend positions on the
importance
of the rule of law and on the sources, purposes, and
functions of law.
I.B.4 The relationship of limited government to
political and economic freedom. Students should be
able to explain and evaluate competing ideas
regarding the relationship between political and
economic freedoms.
I.C.1. Concepts of “constitution.” Students should be
able to explain different uses of the term
“constitution” and to distinguish between
governments with a constitution and a constitutional
government.
II.C.2. Purposes and uses of constitutions. Students
should be able to explain the various purposes served
by constitutions.
I. D.1. Shared and parliamentary systems. Students
should be able to describe the major characteristics of
systems of shared powers and of parliamentary
systems.
II.A.1The American idea of constitutional
government.
Students should be able to explain the central ideas
of American constitutional government and their
history.
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
Government in a constitutional democracy is
responsible for protecting individual rights and
providing for national security.
Unlimited governments concentrate political power in
one person, such as a king. A constitutional
government is characterized by legal limits on political
power.
Laws can be used to restrict the actions of private
citizens and government officials alike in order to
protect the rights of individuals and promote the
common good.
Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are
political freedoms established by the Constitution.
Time and experience leave their mark on a
constitution. The U.S. Constitution is a written
document that defines the government and makes it
responsible for protecting the rights of those under its
authority. The document and our understanding of it
have evolved over time.
The U.S. Constitution defines the structure and
function of the government. It also establishes the
relationship between the people and the government.
We have a three-branch system of government in
which power is shared by the executive, legislative and
judicial branches.
Key documents:
Declaration of Independence (1776)
Articles of Confederation (1781)
U.S. Constitution (1787)
Bill of Rights (1791)
Page 1 of 4
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Specific Content Standards
II.A.2. How American constitutional government
has shaped the character of American society
Students should be able to explain the extent to which
Americans have internalized the values and principles
of the Constitution and attempted to make its ideals
realities.
II.D.3. Fundamental values and principles. Students
should be able to evaluate, take, and defend positions
on what the fundamental values and principles of
American political life are and their importance to the
maintenance of constitutional democracy.
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
The evolution of our understanding of free speech and
press rights occurred because people sought to make
the ideals of those freedoms a reality.
The following values and principles are fundamental to
American civic life:
• individual rights (majority and minority rights)
• justice
• self-government
• truth
Principles fundamental to American constitutional
democracy include:
• individual rights
• rule of law
• separated and shared powers
• checks and balances
II.D.4 Conflicts among values and principles in
American political and social life. Students should be
able to evaluate, take, and defend positions on issues
in which fundamental values and principles may be in
conflict.
II.D.5 Disparities between ideals and reality in
American political and social life.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions about issues concerning the disparities
between American ideals and realities.
III.A.1. Distributing governmental power and
preventing its abuse. Students should be able to
explain how the United States Constitution
grants and distributes power to national and state
government and how it seeks to prevent the abuse of
power.
III.B.1. The institutions of the national government.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions on issues regarding the purposes,
organization, and functions of the institutions of the
national government.
Individual rights and the common good often clash in
wartimes.
The relentless pursuit of freedom of speech and the
press by an insistent public did not go unnoticed by
the Supreme Court. After almost 200 years, it finally
reaffirmed the First Amendment.
The system of checks and balances in our government
prevents any one branch from becoming too powerful.
Executive branch: enforces the laws
President, Department of Defense
Legislative branch: makes the laws
Congress (Senate, House of Representatives)
Judicial branch: interprets the laws
Supreme Court and federal court system
Page 2 of 4
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Specific Content Standards
III.D.1. The place of law in American society. Students
should be able to evaluate, take, and defend positions
on the role and importance of law in the American
political system.
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
Courts make decisions based on the rule of law in
order to protect the rights of citizens and promote the
common good. Key cases in the lesson:
Supreme Court – Appellate Court
Abrams v. United States
Debs v. United States
Marbury v. Madison
New York Times v. United States
Schenck v. United States
Federal Court—Trial Court
United States v. Matthew Lyon
III.D.1. Judicial protection of the rights of individuals.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions on current issues regarding the judicial
protection of individual rights.
The Constitution ensures judicial fairness and
protection of individual rights to all under its authority
–
citizen and noncitizen. The courts are the means of
conflict resolution where individuals can challenge the
constitutionality of laws and appeal all the way to the
Supreme Court.
The high-profile cases in the lesson made the news
and captured the attention and interest of the public.
By keeping the public informed, the press helped
shape public opinion.
The people and the press are often referred to as the
fourth branch because they are needed to keep the
government in check. Public opinion is influenced by
what appears in the news, which gives added power
to the press.
Students learn about the meaning and importance of
freedom of the press throughout our history and how
our understanding of it evolved to become what it is
today.
III.E.1 The public agenda. Students should be able to
evaluate, take, and defend positions about how the
public agenda is set.
III.E.2 Public opinion and behavior of the electorate.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions about the role of public opinion in American
politics.
III.E.3 Political communication: television, radio, the
press, and political persuasion.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions on the influence of the media on American
political life.
V.A.1. The meaning of citizenship in the United
States.
Students should be able to explain the meaning
of citizenship in the United States.
V.A.2. Becoming a citizen. Students should be able to
evaluate, take, and defend positions
on issues regarding the criteria used for naturalization.
V.B.2 Political rights. Students should be able to
evaluate, take, and defend positions on issues
regarding political rights.
Only citizens have the right to vote. Citizens have the
responsibility to be informed about what their
government is doing.
A knowledgeable citizenry is essential for protecting
democracy. Therefore, basic knowledge of civics
(history and government) is a requirement for those
seeking citizenship.
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are
important political rights that allow individuals to
criticize the government without fear of punishment.
These rights are articulated in the First Amendment.
Page 3 of 4
National Standards for Civics and Government
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
National Standards for Civics and
Government Gr. 9-12
Specific Content Standards
V.B.5. Scope and limits of rights. Students should be
able to evaluate, take, and defend positions on issues
regarding the proper scope and limits of rights.
V.C.2. Civic responsibilities. Students should be able
to evaluate, take, and defend positions on the
importance of civic responsibilities to the individual
and society.
V.D.4. Dispositions that facilitate thoughtful and
effective participation in public affairs. Students
should be able to evaluate, take, and defend positions
on the importance to American constitutional
democracy of dispositions that facilitate thoughtful
and effective participation in public affairs.
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Understandings Reinforced by the Lesson
The scope and limit of rights related to freedom of
speech and the press are defined by principles
established through Supreme Court decisions and case
law. These criteria and considerations are noted
• Clear and present danger test
• National security
When criticizing the government was against the law,
some concerned citizens did so anyway out of moral
obligation and because they had the right to free
speech and a free press. Because they challenged the
system, the rights to free speech and a free press
evolved to be what they are today.
The following traits were evident in the citizens,
noncitizens, justices, president and Congress:
• persistence
• courage
• respect for the law
• tolerance of ambiguity
• honesty
• open-mindedness
V.E.1. The relationship between politics and the
attainment of individual and public goals. Students
should be able to evaluate, take and defend positions
on the relationship between politics and the
attainment of individual and public goals
Participation in the judicial process is not only a way to
resolve current disputes, but also a way to affect the
way of life for others in the future.
V.E.3. Forms of political participation.
Students should be able to evaluate, take, and defend
positions about the means that citizens should use to
monitor and influence the formation and
implementation of public policy.
Forms of political participation by parties in the court
cases:
• Civil disobedience
• Filing a legal challenge in court
• Demonstrations
• Writing letters
• Speeches at a rally
Citizens who vote participate in the political process.
Voting gives citizens the power to check the
government.
V.E.5. Knowledge and participation.
Students should be able to explain the importance of
knowledge to competent and responsible
participation in American democracy.
A constitutional democracy requires the participation
of an attentive, knowledgeable and competent
citizenry. The people and the press are the last
defenders of liberty. Without them, government
power would go unchecked and democracy would no
longer exist.
Page 4 of 4
Common Core State Standards
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Document: English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects
http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Reading in History/Social Studies 6-8
Key Ideas and Details
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.1 Cite specific textual
evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary
sources.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.2 Determine the central
ideas or information of a primary or secondary source;
provide an accurate summary of the source distinct
from prior knowledge or opinions.
Craft and Structure
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.4 Determine the meaning of
words and phrases as they are used in a text, including
vocabulary specific to domains related to
history/social studies.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.5 Describe how a text
presents information (e.g., sequentially,
comparatively, causally).
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.6 Identify aspects of a text
that reveal an author’s point of view or purpose (e.g.,
loaded language, inclusion or avoidance of particular
facts).
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.7 Integrate visual
information (e.g., in charts, graphs, photographs,
videos, or maps) with other information in print and
digital texts.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.8 Distinguish among fact,
opinion, and reasoned judgment in a text.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.9 Analyze the relationship
between a primary and secondary source on the same
topic.
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.6-8.10 By the end of grade 8,
read and comprehend history/social studies texts in
the grades 6–8 text complexity band independently
and proficiently.
Writing 6-8
Text Types and Purposes
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.1 Write arguments
focused on discipline-specific content.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.2 Write
informative/explanatory texts, including the narration
of historical events, scientific procedures/
experiments, or technical processes.
Production and Distribution of Writing
Support from the Lesson
Students cite text from the Constitution related to
freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They
cite text from Supreme Court opinions.
Students summarize the facts and key points of each
case after reading a primary or secondary source.
History, government, and civics terms are provided for
review and study. Students define prior restraint and
seditious libel.
Students work with information presented in
chronological order.
Students extract points made in the majority opinions
for each case as well as a relevant dissenting opinion.
Students synthesize information from print and online
sources (e.g., videos, books, glossaries). They use a
visual to track the story line.
Students learn about the facts of each case and the
reasoned judgment behind each opinion by the Court.
Students use and compare primary and secondary
sources to gather details about each Guantanamo
case.
Students engage informational text that includes
material appropriate for this grade band. (See text
exemplars in Appendix B of the ELA standards)
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Support from the Lesson
Students write responses to opinion questions and
justify their answers.
Students respond to questions and issues that require
the narration of historical events.
Page 1 of 5
Common Core State Standards
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.4 Produce clear and
coherent writing in which the development,
organization, and style are appropriate to task,
purpose, and audience.
Research to Build and Present Knowledge
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.7 Conduct short research
projects to answer a question (including a selfgenerated question), drawing on several sources and
generating additional related, focused questions that
allow for multiple avenues of exploration.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.8 Gather relevant
information from multiple print and digital sources,
using search terms effectively; assess the credibility
and accuracy of each source; and quote or paraphrase
the data and conclusions of others while avoiding
plagiarism and following a standard format for
citation.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.9 Draw evidence from
informational texts to support analysis reflection, and
research.
Range of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.6-8.10 Write routinely over
extended time frames (time for reflection and
revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a
day or two) for a range of discipline-specific tasks,
purposes, and audiences.
Reading in History/Social Studies 9-10
Key Ideas and Details
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.1 Cite specific textual
evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary
sources, attending to such features as the date and
origin of the information.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.2 Determine the central
ideas or information of a primary or secondary source;
provide an accurate summary of how key events or
ideas develop over the course of the text.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.3 Analyze in detail a series
of events described in a text; determine whether
earlier events caused later ones or simply preceded
them.
Craft and Structure
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.4 Determine the meaning
of words and phrases as they are used in a text,
including vocabulary describing political, social, or
economic aspects of history/social science.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.5 Analyze how a text uses
structure to emphasize key points or advance an
explanation or analysis.
Students have different writing tasks and write for
different purposes. These include writing to explain,
describe, convey personal opinion, answer questions,
reflect, analyze and interpret.
Students consult multiples sources to research and
respond to questions and tasks in the Class-Prep
Assignment. Extension activities provide prompts for
short research projects.
Students research to gather information from print
and digital sources identified in the lesson. They are
required to quote, paraphrase and cite sources.
Students consult a variety of informational texts in
order to answer questions that require analysis,
reflection and research.
Students write for a variety of purposes (e.g., to
explain, describe, list, answer questions, report,
reflect).
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Support from the Lesson
Students cite text from the Constitution related to
freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They
cite text from Supreme Court opinions.
Students summarize the facts of each case after
reading from primary and secondary sources.
Students analyze the evolution of our understanding
of the First Amendment rights to free speech and a
free press by looking at judicial decisions in 5 cases
and the events surrounding each of them.
History, government and civics terms are provided for
review and study. Students identify the origin and
literal meaning of habeas corpus.
Students consider the structure and organization of
Supreme Court opinions
Page 2 of 5
Common Core State Standards
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.6 Compare the point of
view of two or more authors for how they treat the
same or similar topics, including which details they
include and emphasize in their respective accounts.
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.7 Integrate quantitative or
technical analysis (e.g., charts, research data) with
qualitative analysis in print or digital text.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.8 Assess the extent to
which the reasoning and evidence in a text support
the author’s claims.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.9 Compare and contrast
treatments of the same topic in several primary and
secondary sources.
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.10 By the end of grade 10,
read and comprehend history/social studies texts in
the grades 9–10 text complexity band independently
and proficiently.
Writing 9-10
Text Types and Purposes
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.1 Write arguments
focused on discipline-specific content.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.2 Write
informative/explanatory texts, including the narration
of historical events, scientific procedures/
experiments, or technical processes.
Production and Distribution of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.4 Produce clear and
coherent writing in which the development,
organization, and style are appropriate to task,
purpose, and audience.
Research to Build and Present Knowledge
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.7 Conduct short as well
as more sustained research projects to answer a
question (including a self-generated question) or solve
a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when
appropriate; synthesize multiple sources on the
subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject
under investigation.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.8 Gather relevant
information from multiple authoritative print and
digital sources, using advanced searches effectively;
assess the usefulness of each source in answering the
research question; integrate information into the text
selectively to maintain the flow of ideas, avoiding
plagiarism and following a standard format for citation
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.9 Draw evidence from
informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and
research.
Range of Writing
Students extract points made in the majority opinions
for each case as well as a dissenting opinion.
Students gather data from a poll and provide an
interpretive analysis.
Students learn about the facts of each case and the
reasoned judgment behind each opinion by the Court.
Students use and compare primary and secondary
sources to gather details about each case in the video.
Students engage informational text that includes
material appropriate for this grade band. (See text
exemplars in Appendix B of the ELA standards)
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Support from the Lesson
Students write responses to opinion questions and
justify their answers.
Students respond to questions and issues that require
the narration of historical events.
Students have different writing tasks and write for
different purposes. These include writing to explain
describe, convey personal opinion, answer questions,
reflect, analyze and interpret.
Students consult multiples sources to research and
respond to questions and tasks in the Class-Prep
Assignment. Extension activities provide prompts for
short research projects.
Students research to gather information from print
and digital sources identified in the lesson. They are
required to quote, paraphrase and cite sources.
Students consult a variety of informational texts in
order to answer questions that require analysis,
reflection and research.
Page 3 of 5
Common Core State Standards
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.9-10.10 Write routinely over
extended time frames (time for reflection and
revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a
day or two) for a range of discipline-specific tasks,
purposes, and audiences.
Reading in History/Social Studies 11-12
Key Ideas and Details
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.1 Cite specific textual
evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary
sources, connecting insights gained from specific
details to an understanding of the text as a whole.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.2 Determine the central
ideas or information of a primary or secondary source;
provide an accurate summary that makes clear the
relationships among the key details and ideas.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.3 Evaluate various
explanations for actions or events and determine
which explanation best accords with textual evidence,
acknowledging where the text leaves matters
uncertain.
Craft and Structure
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.4 Determine the meaning
of words and phrases as they are used in a text,
including analyzing how an author uses and refines the
meaning of a key term over the course of a text (e.g.,
how Madison defines faction in Federalist No. 10).
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.5 Analyze in detail how a
complex primary source is structured, including how
key sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the
text contribute to the whole.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.6 Evaluate authors’
differing points of view on the same historical event or
issue by assessing the authors’ claims, reasoning, and
evidence.
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.7 Integrate and evaluate
multiple sources of information presented in diverse
formats and media (e.g., visually, quantitatively, as
well as in words) in order to address a question or
solve a problem.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.8 Evaluate an author’s
premises, claims, and evidence by corroborating or
challenging them with other information.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.9 Integrate information
from diverse sources, both primary and secondary,
into a coherent understanding of an idea or event,
noting discrepancies among sources.
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
Students consult a variety of informational texts in
order to answer questions that require analysis,
reflection and research.
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Support from the Lesson
Students cite text from the Constitution related to
freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They
cite text from Supreme Court opinions.
Students summarize the facts of each case after
reading from primary and secondary sources. .
Students consider the impact of wartime on actions
and decisions made by the president, Congress and
the Supreme Court.
History, government and civics terms are provided for
review and study. Students identify the origin and
literal meaning of habeas corpus.
Students consider the structure and organization of
Supreme Court opinions.
Students encounter different points of view held by
Supreme Court justices on the same case by reading
quotes from dissenting and majority opinions.
Students synthesize information from print and online
sources (e.g., videos, articles, books, excerpts).
Students learn about the facts of each case and the
reasoned judgment behind each opinion by the Court
and evaluate the premises of justices.
Students use information from multiple sources to
better understand the important role of habeas
corpus in a constitutional democracy and its
controversial use or abuse in wartime
Page 4 of 5
Common Core State Standards
Lesson: Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.10 By the end of grade 12,
read and comprehend history/social studies texts in
the grades 11–CCR text complexity band
independently and proficiently.
Writing 11-12
Text Types and Purposes
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.1 Write arguments
focused on discipline-specific content.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.2 Write
informative/explanatory texts, including the narration
of historical events, scientific procedures/
experiments, or technical processes.
Production and Distribution of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.4 Produce clear and
coherent writing in which the development,
organization, and style are appropriate to task,
purpose, and audience.
Research to Build and Present Knowledge
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.7 Conduct short as well
as more sustained research projects to answer a
question (including a self-generated question) or solve
a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when
appropriate; synthesize multiple sources on the
subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject
under investigation.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.8 Gather relevant
information from multiple authoritative print and
digital sources, using advanced searches effectively;
assess the strengths and limitations of each source in
terms of the specific task, purpose, and audience;
integrate information into the text selectively to
maintain the flow of ideas, avoiding plagiarism and
overreliance on any one source and following a
standard format for citation.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.9 Draw evidence from
informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and
research.
Range of Writing
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.WHST.11-12.10 Write routinely over
extended time frames (time for reflection and
revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a
day or two) for a range of discipline-specific tasks,
purposes, and audiences.
Students engage informational text that includes
material appropriate for this grade band. (See text
exemplars in Appendix B of the ELA standards)
Lesson:
Defenders of Liberty: The People and the Press
Support from the Lesson
Students write responses to opinion questions and
justify their answers.
Students respond to questions and issues that require
the narration of historical events.
Students have different writing tasks and write for
different purposes. These include writing to explain
describe, convey personal opinion, answer questions,
reflect, analyze and interpret.
Students consult multiples sources to research and
respond to questions and tasks in the Class-Prep
Assignment. Extension activities provide prompts for
short research projects.
Students research to gather information from print
and digital sources identified in the lesson. They are
required to quote, paraphrase and cite sources.
Students consult a variety of informational texts in
order to answer questions that require analysis,
reflection and research.
Students write for a variety of purposes (e.g., to
explain, describe, outline, answer questions, reflect).
Page 5 of 5