Communicators on cspan 2. We take you live now to the National Constitution center for a discussion with legal scholars on the 1th anniversary of the 19th amendment. Guaranteeing women the right to vote. And it will feature the legal scholarsern win chammer and Frederick Lawrence and the great dolly liveic. And friends, i must tell you with great pleasure that on august 16th circumstances permitting the National Constitution center will open our new exhibit how women won the vote about the 19th amendment. It is very relevant to todays topic. It is an exhibit about the history of the expansion of womens suffrage and our team is hard at work and it will be so meaningful to reopen the building which is glimmering behind me on the fake back drop, open the doors and welcome people to see the exhibit. And remember, throughout the program, please put your questions in the chat box and i will introduce them to our panelists as soon as possible. And now, it is my great pleasure to introduce our
Schenk starting from 1918, can be convicted with arime under the espionage act of 1917. And that the First Amendment isnt absolute. And then 9 30, from the 1934 case, holding the internment camps dont violate the constitution as they were needed in world war ii. Watch landmark cases tonight, on cspan three or anytime on cspan. Org. All persons having business for the Supreme Court are required to give their attention. Landmark cases, cspan special history series, produced in collaboration with the constitutional center. 12 historiciz Supreme Court decisions. Number 759. Petitioner. Well hear arguments from number 18. Quite often in our most famous decisions, the court took unpopular decisions. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually, what it means to live in a society, of 310 million different people, who helped to stick together because they believe in the rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspan the landmark cases. Our series explores 12 landm
As person having being before the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States are to draw near and give their attention. The special history series, produced in partnership with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories, and constitutional dramas behind 12 historic [ decisions. Mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court quite obvious in much of our most famous decisions are the ones that the court took that were quite unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of different people who helped stick together, because they believe in a rule of law. Good evening. Welcome to cspans landmark cases. This 1969 case of the warren Court Unanimously handed down with you most expansive interpretations ever of our First Amendment guarantees to fry speech and assembly. What are the very basics . Vandenberg was the leader of the ku klux klan in cincinnati, ohio, who held a rally for his members of hi
And hate speech topping free speech . I have seen many such miss statements. Just to summarize it, he says that hate speech is a physical imposition because it, languishes a psychological effect imposed physically, bringing about toxic stress, fear and distrust, which are all physical in once neurosurgery. And, it can change the brain lead to threatening action. Quote, when faith is physically in your brain, then you think hate, you feel hate, your moved to act in to carry out what you physically in your narrow system think and feel. That is the summary of what he said hate speech is not free speech. I was wondering response to that. It certainly is true that expression is very powerful and hate speech, which im going to put an air quotes because it does not have a specifically legal definition, lets a hateful, insulting speech on the basis of certain demographic characteristics, certainly can have adverse potentially, have adverse psychological and even physiological impacts. But, not
National conversation through cspans Daily Program or through our social media feeds. Cspan created by americas Cable Television companies as a Public Service and brought to you today by your television provider. All persons having business before the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States are admonished to draw near and give their attention. Landmark cases, cspans special history series produced in partnership with the National Constitution center. Exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 historic Supreme Court decisions. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court. Quite often in many of our most famous decisions are ones that the court took that were quite unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of different people who help stick together because they believe in a rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspan landmark cases. Tonights case is katz versus the United States,