“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
~ The First Amendment of the US Constitution

Introduction: In order to understand how the First Amendment affects our society, we need to understand how the courts, specifically the US Supreme Court, have interpreted these five fundamental rights. This module will explore how the US Supreme Court comes to its decisions. First, you will familiarize yourself with the Supreme Court, its functions, and the terminology needed to understand the basics of court decisions. Then, Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy, the Fred Morgan Kirby Professor of Civil Rights at Lafayette College, will take you through the methods of understanding Supreme Court cases and how the Supreme Court comes to its decisions.

• • Analyze Supreme Court cases using the IPRAC/IRLPRAC method.
  • Identify the factors that influence Supreme Court decisions.
  • Define the judicial philosophies and methods of interpretation that have been used to reach decisions.

Essential Questions for the Module:

• • What rights are expressed and implied by the First Amendment?
  • What methods, philosophies, and ideologies do judges and justices use to make their decisions?
  • What tppls, skills, and methods can be used to analyze and understand Supreme Court decisions?

Module 1 Part 1: Introduction to Analyzing Supreme Court Cases

Introduction: This module introduces you to methods of analyzing Supreme Court cases. Use the resources below to get a foundation for understanding the court and how it functions. The Supreme Court vocabulary guide offers definitions of commonly used words and expressions. The video below will introduce you to the method of analyzing Supreme Court cases called IRLPRAC (Issue, Right, Level of Scrutiny, Precedents, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion).

Module 1 Part 2: Solving Constitutional Puzzles

Introduction: Part 2 explores the philosophical basis that judges and justices use to come to their decisions. In this section, we will briefly explore various components that can lead a judge or justice to their decision, including their jurisprudential approach, political ideology, and legal philosophy.

Module 1 Part 3: Examining the Supreme Court as a Political Scientist

Introduction: There are several indicators about how the Court might decide a case, even though the Court does surprise us at times. You can typically guess how the Supreme Court will probably rule in a case if you understand the jurisprudential approach, political ideology, and legal philosophy of each justice. Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy, the Fred Morgan Kirby Professor of Civil Rights at Lafayette College, provides insight into the influences bearing on every decision made by the Court.

Module 1 Part 4: Using History or Not to Decide Cases? The Uses and (Misuses) of History in Decision-Making.

Introduction: Originalism is a modern term for approaching decisions in Supreme Court cases. Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy, the Fred Morgan Kirby Professor of Civil Rights at Lafayette College, explains “originalism” and other approaches such as history and living, evolving constitutionalism used by modern Justices.

Module 1 Part 5: Clarifying Originalism and the Living Constitution

Introduction: In this lecture, Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy, the Fred Morgan Kirby Professor of Civil Rights at Lafayette College, provides an example of the various ways Justices arrive at their decisions based on Originalism or Living Constitutionalism. Dr. Murphy utilizes United States v Miller (1939) and Hudson v Michigan (2009).

Module 1 Part 6: The Modern Supreme Court – Journey to Living Traditionalism

Introduction: Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy, the Fred Morgan Kirby Professor of Civil Rights at Lafayette College, provides examination of past decisions and the application of the Fourteenth Amendment to further explore the jurisprudential approaches of “originalism and living traditionalism”.

Module 1 Part 7: Privacy versus Privacies of Life

Introduction: Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy, the Fred Morgan Kirby Professor of Civil Rights at Lafayette College explores the challenges of applying “originalism” and “history and tradition” to the Bill of Rights in the Roberts Court.

Module 1 Part 8: Deciding Cases Based on Activism or Self-Restraint and
Using the Speech-Conduct Continuum

Introduction: In the final part of Module 1, Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy, the Fred Morgan Kirby Professor of Civil Rights at Lafayette College provides examples of using the Speech-Conduct Continuum and the application of Footnote #4 of the United States v Carolene Products 1938 decision.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
~ The First Amendment of the US Constitution

Introduction: What does the First Amendment protect? What does the Constitution mean by “speech”? Are the rights found in the Bill of Rights absolute, or are there limitations on what the Constitution protects? In this module, we will explore what the Supreme Court has historically considered to be protected speech and what is not considered protected.

Upon completion of this module, students will be able to:

• • Trace the evolution of the court’s interpretation of freedom of speech.
  • Identify judicial philosophies regarding freedom of speech.
  • Apply the principles of freedom of speech to high school and college campuses.

Essential Questions for the Module:

• • How does the Court distinguish speech from conduct?
  • How do the levels of scrutiny help justices determine how to decide a case involving civil liberties (the Bill of Rights)?
  • What does the First Amendment protect? What does it not protect? How does the Court determine what kind of speech is protected?

Module 2 Part 1: Freedom of Speech: Separating Speech Versus Conduct: Preserving the Free Marketplace of Ideas

Introduction: The First Amendment protects a person’s right to speak their mind, but was that the intent of the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech? Is everything protected, or are there some actions that are not considered protectable speech? Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy introduces Supreme Court Case: Chaplinsky v New Hampshire, 1942 as the example of separating speech from conduct to preserve the free marketplace of ideas.

Module 2 Part 2: The Levels of Scrutiny Technique: Deciding Modern Cases Shifting Judicial Interest

Introduction: Over time, the Supreme Court developed a framework to determine if government (state or federal) had a good reason for enacting the law called “levels of scrutiny.” The Court will use a different level of scrutiny to decide if the state or federal government does have a legitimate interest in regulating that right. Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy introduces levels of scrutiny used by the Supreme Court in making decisions.

Module 2 Part 3: Freedom of Speech: Getting to Five Votes

Introduction: Dr. Bruce Murphy explains the Court Balance History Chart as a tool for analysis of Supreme Court decisions. The power of the middle is explained in getting the five votes necessary for a majority opinion.

Module 2 Part 4: Freedom of Speech: Does the First Amendment Protect Lying?

Introduction: Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy discusses the decision of the Supreme Court in the United States v Alverez 2012 and the Justices using three different levels of scrutiny in its decision.

Module 2 Part 5: Freedom of Speech: Political Speech in Crisis Times in America

Introduction: Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy explains when the Right of Free Speech was applied to the states during World War I and the decisions of the Supreme Court led by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Module 2 Part 6: Freedom of Speech: The Great Dissent

Introduction: Dr Bruce Allen Murphy discusses how Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was influenced by Judge Learned Hand to evolve and expand the tolerance of free speech.

Module 2 Part 7: Freedom of Speech: Protecting the Freedom of Thought that We Hate

Introduction: Dr. Bruce Allen Murphy concludes his lectures on the evolving protection of Freedom of Speech with Oliver Wendell Holmes transition from conservative supporting the government to an absolutist in defending the First Amendment.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
~ The First Amendment of the US Constitution

Introduction: Dr. Graham Lee presents the legal challenges to the separation of church and state from the First Amendment. Thomas Jefferson’s “wall of separation” has  new interpretations in the Supreme Court of the 21^st Century. The student will be learning about the legal cases throughout history so they can analyze and explain the many challenges and defense in preserving the freedom of religion.

Upon completion of this module, students will be able to:

• • Analyze Supreme Court using “the Lemon Test”.
  • Identify the factors that influence Supreme Court decisions.
  • Explain the key legal cases which have defined Freedom of Religion as part of American case law.

Essential Questions for the Module:

• • How did the Supreme Court use Jefferson’s “Wall of separation between church and state” as a guide in making decisions?
  • How has the Roberts Court changed the definition of separation?
  • How has the separation of church and state changed over time in legal decisions?

Module 3 Part 1 – The Establishment Clause

Introduction:  Dr. Graham Lee introduces the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Explanation of religion versus belief is given as a basis for understanding “establishment” and exercise of religion.

Module 3 Part 2: The Wall between Church and State

Introduction: Dr. Graham Lee introduces the concept of “the wall between church and state”. This concept is used as a basis for decision making in the Supreme Court  for the Freedom of Religion clause in the First Amendment.

Module 3 Part 3: Challenging the Wall between Church and State

Introduction: Dr. Graham Lee gives historical background on the evolution of secular support for religious groups.

Module 3 Part 4: Recent Opinions

Introduction: Dr. Graham Lee gives insight into the recent opinions that have changed the wall between church and state.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
~ The First Amendment of the US Constitution

Introduction: Freedom of Assembly and petitioning the government for grievances is an American right guaranteed in the First Amendment.  Other governments prior to 1787 held no respect for such actions. Actions of the British government were included in the grievances of the Declaration of Independence. Assembly and petitioning the government has been challenged from the beginning and continues today. Dr. Nadia Brown introduces the challenges to these rights with modern and historic examples.

Upon completion of this module, students will be able to:

• • Analyze and explain the legal exercise of Freedom of Assembly.
  • Identify times protest has changed laws.
  • Explain how citizens can be involved in peaceful protest.

Essential Questions for the Module:

• • How have legal challenges to peaceful assembly changed legal and social structure?
  • How do engaged citizens stimulate action?  
  • How have the laws for assembly and petitioning the government changed over time?

Module 4, Part 1: The History of Protest in America

Introduction: Dr. Nadia Brown, of Georgetown University,  introduces the right of assembly and petitioning the government in this lecture on the history of protests in the United States.

Module 4 Part 2: Protest Politics and the First Amendment

Introduction: Dr. Nadia Brown, Georgetown University,  expands on the right of assembly and petitioning the government in this lecture on the history of protests in the United States.

Module 4 Part 3: Student Led Protests

Introduction: Dr. Nadia Brown, Georgetown University, talks about protests led by youths and students to demonstrate the right of assembly and petitioning the government.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
~ The First Amendment of the US Constitution

Introduction: Dr. Keith Whittington of Yale Law School talks about the relationship throughout history of the press and government censorship. This lecture series will focus on topics for the 21st Century of social media and traditional press. Dr. Whittington includes explanation of legal decisions from the Supreme Court.

Upon completion of this module, students will be able to:

• • analyze legal cases brought before the United States Supreme Court that challenged Freedom of the Press
  • define and use the term “prior restraint v subsequent punishment” in legal studies
  • assess the challenges facing freedom of the press in the modern court.

Essential Questions for the Module:

• • How did practice of prior restraint influence creation of the First Amendment?
  • How did the meaning of obscene and offensive speech in the press change over time?
  • What is the litigious history of slander and libel in the United States?
  • How do the guides used by the current Supreme Court influence the challenges to Freedom of the Press?

Module 5 Part 1: Prior Restraint v Subsequent Punishment

Introduction: Dr. Keith Whittington of Yale Law School talks about the relationship throughout history of the press and government censorship. Focus is on the use of prior restraint versus subsequent punishment for the published word.

Module 5 Part 2: Freedom of the Press: Libel

Introduction: Dr. Keith Whittington of Yale Law School explains libel and slanderous speech not protected under the First Amendment.

Module 5 Part 3: Freedom of the Press: Obscene and Offensive

Introduction:Dr. Keith Whittington of Yale Law School explains the determination of obscene and offensive speech.

Module 5 Part 4: Freedom of the Press and Social Media

Introduction: Dr. Keith Whittington of Yale Law School explains how social media of the 21st century relates to the First Amendment.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
~ The First Amendment of the US Constitution

Module 6, Part 1: Deliberative Democracy: An Introduction

Introduction: Deliberative democracy is a flexible tool for spurring interaction and increasing participant investment and interest in a topic. In this lesson, students will be introduced to the philosophy and structure of deliberative democracy in order to begin planning their own town hall-style discussions.

Objectives: Upon completion of this module, students will be able to:

1. Explain the concept of deliberative democracy.
2. Identify the flexible ways in which deliberative democracy can be used in and outside the classroom.
3. Plan and conduct a deliberative democracy session which includes, at a minimum:

• • Identifying and defining a topic of interest (the topic must have at least two clear “sides” or positions).
  • Identifying or developing or instructing students to develop neutral material on the topic for the participants.
  • Creation of unbiased discussion questions to lead the participants through the topic.
  • Training of small group leaders.
  • Identification of experts – or leading students in identifying and inviting experts to the discussion. Brief ‘training” of experts to ensure that they understand that their role is that of education, not advocacy.

Module 6 Part 2: Topics in Deliberative Democracy

Introduction: The first step in conducting a deliberative democracy session is deciding on a topic. There is no shortage of topics that would appropriate for this kind of event, so the trick is narrowing down a timely, relevant topic that would be interesting to participants. It can be helpful to follow the guidelines in the League of Women Voters of San Luis Obispo’s Code of Civility even when discussing what topics to consider for the project.
Objectives: Upon completion of this module, students will be able to:

1. Articulate the uses of deliberative democracy.
2. Explain the benefits of deliberative democracy for participants.
3. Assess and evaluate potential discussion topics.

Module 6 Part 3: Leading a Deliberative Democracy Event

Introduction: Deliberative Democracy: A Deeper Dive and the Nitty Gritty .

In this lesson, you will learn how to prepare and host a deliberative democracy forum/event. The materials provided will help you construct your own.

Objectives: Upon completion of this module, students will be able to:

1. Explain the societal issues that the deliberative democracy process seeks to address.
2. Discuss the use of deliberative democracy throughout the world. 
3. Articulate the history of deliberative democracy.
4. Revise sample materials provided to organize your own deliberative democracy session.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
~ The First Amendment of the US Constitution

Module 7: Additional Resources

Introduction: This Module contains additional resources and reference material including speaker bios, a case book, and special videos entitle “Unraveling the Puzzle” with Federal Judges discussing significant First Amendment cases.