First Amendment Protections in the Age of Terrorism

Abstract

In the early twentieth century, the United States Supreme Court made its first modern-era rulings determining what speech was protected by constitutional guarantee under the first amendment. The decisions in Schenck vs. United States, Minersville School District v. Gobitis, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire, The United States Supreme Court dictated a narrow set of terms defining proscribed or restricted speech and expression. Toward the mid twentieth century in Brandenburg vs. Ohio, a further narrowing of proscribed speech occurred although no consensus or clear decision was reached on religious speech protections. The result of no clear rulings on religious speech became apparent in the outcomes of two early twenty-first century cases: Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project and United States vs. Mehanna. The United States government was able to deny American citizens fundamental first amendment rights and prosecute them for their religious interpretations using a loose thread linking their thoughts and words to terrorist activities.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
May 04, 2015
Accession Number
AD1175973

Entities

People

  • David Mcgraw

Organizations

  • Marine Corps University

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Human Systems

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Civil Rights
  • Congress
  • Counterterrorism
  • Education
  • Federal Law
  • Freedom Of Speech
  • Governments
  • Information Operations
  • Law
  • Law Enforcement
  • National Politics
  • National Security
  • Political Systems
  • Supreme Court
  • Terrorism
  • Terrorists
  • United States
  • United States Government
  • Urban Areas
  • West Virginia

Readers

  • Criminal Law
  • Military History of the United States in the 20th Century.
  • Strategic Security Studies