OGT Benchmark: Explain how individual rights are relative, not absolute, and describe the balance between individual rights, the rights of others, and the common good.

1
OGT Benchmark Explain how individual rights are
relative, not absolute, and describe the balance
between individual rights, the rights of others,
and the common good.

• The Rights of U.S. Citizens
• Times When Individual Rights Have Been Restricted

2
I. The Rights of U.S. Citizens

• Bill of Rights
• 1st amendment freedom of religion,
  speech, and the press
• 2nd amendment right of peaceful assembly
  and petition
• 4th amendment protection against unreasonable
  search and seizure
• 5th amendment double jeopardy, right to refuse
  to testify against oneself, protection
  against being deprived of life,
  liberty, or property without due
  process of law

3
I. The Rights of U.S. Citizens

• Bill of Rights
• 6th amendment right to speedy, public trial by
  an impartial jury. Right to confront
  witnesses, right to subpoena
  witnesses, right to have an attorney
• 7th amendment Right to a jury trial in a civil
  suit
• 8th amendment Protection against excessive bail
  or fines, protection against cruel and
  unusual punishment

4
A. Restrictions on Rights on U.S. Citizens

• rights are NOT ABSOLUTE
• examples
• a. religion cant have human/animal sacrifice
• b. speech cant threaten others
• Must be balance between individual rights, the
  rights of others, and the common good
• criteria used to determine limits on individual
  rights
• a. clear and present danger
• b. compelling government interest
• c. libel
• d. national security
• e. public safety
• f. equal opportunity

5
II. Times When Individual Rights Have Been
Restricted

• There have been many times in U.S. history when
  individual rights have been restricted

6
A. WWI and the Standard of Clear and Present
Danger

• 1. outlawed interference with the draft
• 2. punishment 20 years in prison ad 10,000
  fine
• 3. overall, 2000 convicted

7
Schenck v. United States

• 1. Charles Schenck, member of the Socialist
  Party
• 2. sent 15,000 flyers to people trying to get
  them to refuse the draft
• 3. In 1919, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
  established clear and present danger rule
• 4. speech is not absolute
• 5. can be restricted if there is a clear and
  present danger of its producing harm to others

8
Debs v. the United States

1. 1918, Eugene V. Debs, a Socialist labor leader
2. Speech in Canton, Ohio
3. Socialism is the answer. I might not be able to
   say all that I think, but you need to know that
   you are fit for something better than slavery and
   cannon fodder.
4. he was arrested, convicted, and sentenced to 10
   years in prison
5. he broke clear and present danger rule

9
B. Conscientious Objectors

• 1. you do not have to fight in combat if
  religion strictly forbids it (church HAD to show
  a history of being against war)
• 2. must be approved by the draft board
• 3. many were forced to be drafted, then
  court-martialed when they refused
• 4. those who did get out--they would have to do
  alternative service
• 5. treatment of conscientious objectors
• a. those who refused alternative service were
  treated harshly (prison and public humiliation)
• 6. Rights were taken away from conscientious
  objectors because of clear and present danger and
  national security

10
C. Compelling Government Interest

• 1. Ex protecting children from indecent
  content on TV
• 2. Communications Decency Act restrictions on
  the Internet. Supreme Court overturned this!
• 3. Bakke vs. California (1978) and Grutter vs.
  Bollinger (2003)
• The compelling government interest using race
  as a factor of accepting students into colleges
• Bakke case Race used as an admissions criteria
  (affirmative action)
• Grutter white woman who wanted to get into U.
  of Michigan Law School challenged this. She won
  in district court, but Supreme Court upheld Bakke
  decision that race can be used as an admissions
  criteria

11

• 4. Eminent domain citizens can be forced to
  sell land to the gov. so that roads can be built
  on that land
• This is compelling gov. interest in providing a
  public service

12
D. Libel

• 1. Restriction of freedom of speech cant
  defame someones reputation by speaking lies
• 2. only living people
• 3. true statements are never considered libel
• Ex newspaper can print a restaurants health
  code violations

13
E. National Security and the Red Scare

• 1st Red Scare (1917 to 1920) Fear of
  immigrants, of Communism because of the Bolshevik
  Revolution in Russia, and of foreigners
• Ex Sacco and Venzetti, A. Mitchell Palmer
• 2nd Red Scare (1948-1956) Fear of Communism,
  Cold War
• Ex Joseph McCarthy

14
1. OGT Multiple Choice

• To silence critics during World War I, the
  government used which of the following criteria
  for limiting individual rights?
• A. compelling government interest
• B. clear and present danger
• C. libel
• D. equal opportunity

15
2. OGT Multiple Choice

• Which Supreme Court case used the compelling
  government interest criterion?
• A. Schneck vs. United States
• B. Debs v. United States
• C. Grutter v. Bollinger
• D. Abrams v. United States

16
3. OGT Multiple Choice

• Laws that restrict toxic emissions from factory
  smokestacks are an example of which of the
  following criteria for limiting rights?
• A. national security
• B. libel
• C. public safety
• D. equal opportunity

17
4. OGT Multiple Choice

• What tactic did both A. Mitchell Palmer and
  Joseph McCarthy use to gain support for their
  actions?
• A. They sponsored public forms to debate
  communism
• B. They encouraged free expression of
  communistic ideas
• C. They organized protest rallies to raise pubic
  awareness
• D. They manipulated public fear of communism

18
5. OGT Multiple Choice

• In a letter to the editor of a local paper, a
  citizen made knowingly false statements about a
  neighbor in order to cause the neighbor public
  embarrassment. This is an example of
• A. clear and present danger
• B. libel
• C. due process
• D. compelling interest

19
6. OGT Multiple Choice

• (OGT Test, 2008) During World War I,
  conscientious objectors to military service were
  often accused of disloyalty, and some
  conscientious objectors were sentenced to prison.
  However, other conscientious objectors were
  willing to accept noncombatant service.
• A. balance individual rights and the common
  good.
• B. educate people about their constitutional
  rights.
• C. promote ethnic diversity within the military.
  
• D. encourage people to apply for conscientious
  objector status.

20
7. OGT Multiple Choice

• (OGT Test, 2007) When the government builds
  interstate highways, citizens can be forced
  (under the principle of eminent domain) to sell
  private land that lies in the path of the
  highway. The reason for this is that the property
  rights of individuals are balanced by
• A. the governments need to raise tax revenues.
• B. the need to enforce laws against libel and
  slander.
• C. a compelling government interest in providing
  public services.
• D. the need to guarantee equal opportunities to
  all citizens.

21
8. OGT Multiple Choice

• (OGT Test, 2007) Freedom of assembly is
  guaranteed by the First Amendment, but assemblies
  may legally be broken up when protesters
• A. publicly oppose U.S. foreign policy.
• B. attempt to disrupt public safety.
• C. express opinions that are controversial.
• D. are members of a religious organization.

22
9. OGT Multiple Choice

• (OGT Test, 2006) In the United States, freedom of
  the press to report on certain matters may be
  restricted during wartime because
• A. reporting military secrets may threaten
  national security.
• B. laws against libel and slander are strictly
  enforced during wartime.
• C. materials used to print newspapers must be
  conserved during wartime.
• D. the government has a compelling interest in
  suppressing opposing views.

23
10. OGT Multiple Choice

• (OGT Test, 2005) In the United States, a
  citizens exercise of speech and expression may
  be legally restricted when that individual
• A. condemns public institutions.
• B. opposes public opinion.
• C. criticizes public officials.
• D. threatens public safety.

24
11. OGT Multiple Choice

• When would the right of freedom of religion be
  restricted?
• A. A religious group goes door-to-door to talk
  about its beliefs.
• B. A televangelist asks people to send his
  church money.
• C. A religious cult uses animal sacrifices as
  part of its rituals.
• D. A group of people say they are atheistthey
  do not believe in God.

25
12. OGT Multiple Choice

• (2005 Practice Test) Charles Schenck was found
  guilty of violating the 1917 Espionage Act by
  distributing leaflets through the mail urging men
  to resist induction under the military draft for
  World War I. On appeal, Schencks attorneys
  argued the distribution of the leaflets was
  protected by the 1st Amendment. The Supreme
  Court upheld his convictions. This case
  illustrates how individual rights can be balanced
  against
• A. the rights of other individuals
• B. the security of the nation in a time of war
• C. The opportunities for people to enlist in the
  military
• D. the interest of the gov. in keeping courts
  open to provide justice

26
OGT Extended Response

• In 1918, Eugene V. Debs, a leader of the American
  Socialist Party, gave an antiwar speech in
  Canton, Ohio. In the speech, Debs supported
  other Socialist leader who has already been
  arrested for their opposition to the draft. Debs
  said, You have your lives to loseYou need to
  know that you are fit for something better than
  slavery and cannon fodder. Because of this
  speech, Debs was arrested, tried, and convicted
  for violating the Sedition Act (1918), which was
  an amendment to the Espionage Act. The Sedition
  Act prohibited any speech that interfered with
  the military draft.
• Do you think Debs speech constituted a clear and
  present danger to the laws of the United States?
  Why or why not?
• Do you agree with the Courts decision in this
  case? Why or why not?