Overview of the American Legal System and Constitutional Law

US District Courts

Lowest level of the federal court system, handling federal cases involving constitutional issues, federal law, and disputes between states or citizens of different states.

US Court of Appeals

Intermediate level of the Federal System that reviews decisions from district courts to determine if legal errors were made.

US Supreme Court

Highest level of the federal court system that hears cases on constitutional issues and disputes between federal and state laws, with the power of judicial review.

State Trial Courts

Handle most criminal and civil cases, with decisions that can be appealed to higher state courts.

State Appellate Courts

Review trial court decisions for legal errors.

State Supreme Court

Can hear appeals from lower state courts, with some decisions potentially reviewed by the US Supreme Court in constitutional issues.

State Action

Refers to actions taken by government entities or officials at the state or local level, important in Constitutional Law regarding civil rights protections.

Originalism

Interprets the Constitution according to what the framers intended.

Original Intent

Focuses on the framers' intended meaning of the Constitution.

Original Public Meaning

Focuses on how the text would have been understood by reasonable people at the time of ratification.

Living Constitutionalism

Views the Constitution as an evolving document whose meaning changes with societal developments.

Textualism

Prioritizes the ordinary meaning of the Constitutional Text, focusing on what the words meant at the time they were written.

Purposivism/Functionalism

Interprets provisions according to their underlying purpose or function, considering the goals the framers sought to achieve.

Pragmatism

Evaluates interpretations based on their practical consequences, considering social, political, and economic impacts.

Moral Reading

Views the Constitution as embodying abstract moral principles that judges must interpret in their best moral light.

Structural Interpretation

Derives meaning from the overall constitutional structure and relationships between provisions, examining federalism and separation of powers.

Historical Practice/Precedent

Gives weight to how the constitution has been understood and applied throughout history, valuing stability and continuity.

Strict Scrutiny

To survive, the state interest must be compelling, and the law must be narrowly tailored to achieve that purpose.

Intermediate Scrutiny

To survive, the government interest must be significant, and the law must be substantially related to that interest.

Rational Basis Review

To survive, the state interest only needs to be legitimate, and the law must be rationally related to that interest.

Content-based Speech

Regulations on speech can be content-based if they target the subject matter or viewpoint of the speech.

Content-based restrictions

Laws prohibiting specific types of speech that receive rigorous constitutional scrutiny due to the risk of government censorship of disfavored ideas.

History and Development of the 1st Amendment

The 1st Amendment was created to protect freedoms of religion, press, assembly, and speech due to fears of central government power.

Public Forums

Traditional public spaces used for free expression that receive the highest level of 1st Amendment protection.

Limited Public Forums

Government property intentionally opened for expressive activity with the same protections as public forums while open, but can be closed or modified by government.

Non-Public Forums

Government property not traditionally used for public expression where reasonable restrictions are allowed, subject to rational basis review.

Vagueness and Overbreadth

Laws regulating speech must be clear and precise; vague or overbroad laws can be struck down as unconstitutional.

True Threats

Communications that issue a threat or are viewed as a threat are not protected by the 1st Amendment.

Inciteful Speech

Speech that incites violence or unlawful action may not be protected by the 1st Amendment.

Prior Restraint

Government censorship of speech before it is published or spoken, generally disfavored under the 1st Amendment.

Hate Speech

Expression that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group based on attributes such as race, religion, or sexual orientation, with complex legal protections.

Content-Neutral Speech

Restrictions on speech that are not based on content, subject to intermediate scrutiny.

Government Speech

The government has the right to control its own speech.

Balancing Free Press/Speech vs. Right to Fair Trial

Courts balance media freedom against defendants' rights to fair trials, often restricting publicity that could prejudice jurors.

Symbolic Speech

Actions that express an idea and are protected by the 1st Amendment, such as wearing a black armband to protest.

Defamation

A false statement that harms someone's reputation.

Defenses against Defamation

Includes truth, fair comment, criticism, and neutral reportage privilege.

Fair comment and criticism

Protects expressions of opinion about public performances of people who place themselves before the public.

Neutral reportage privilege

Protects the media when reporting on newsworthy statements, even if they are defamatory.

New York Times v. Sullivan

A landmark case that established the standard for proving defamation against public figures.

Content-neutral time/place/manner restrictions

Allowed restrictions that do not target the content of speech but regulate the manner in which it is expressed.

Ex. of Public Forum

A city park where political rallies are regularly held.

Ex. of Limited Public Forum

A city hall that allows public comments during specific meeting periods.

Ex. of Non-Public Forum

A courthouse hallway where all demonstrations are prohibited.

Ex. of Symbolic Speech

A student wearing a black armband to silently protest a government policy.

Sullivan case

Established that a public official must prove 'actual malice' to recover damages for a defamatory falsehood.

Actual malice

Means that the statement was made with the knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.

Commercial Speech

Communication that proposes a commercial transaction or promotes a commercial product or service.

Intermediate scrutiny

Means commercial speech must be truthful and not misleading, lawful activity, directly advance that interest and no more than that.

False Advertising

A form of commercial speech that involves making deceptive, misleading, or untruthful statements about a product or service.

Brandenburg v. Ohio

Case concerning speech potentially inciting violence.

Elonis v. U.S.

Case addressing true threats and intent to communicate threats.

Rational Basis Review

State interest only needs to be legitimate and law must be rationally related or non-arbitrary to that interest.

Intermediate Scrutiny

State interest must be genuine (not post hoc) and important; law's relation to interest must be substantially related.

Strict Scrutiny

State interest must be compelling; law must be necessary to achieve purpose and narrowly tailored.

NY Times v. U.S.

Key principles include open debate vital to national health and First Amendment protects press freedom from censorship.

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul

Constitutional limitations include First Amendment restricts content discrimination.

Frisby v. Schultz

Key considerations include protection of residential privacy and preserving home's tranquility and well-being.

Public Forums

Places traditionally used for expressive activity with the highest constitutional protection.

Limited Public Forums

State-opened property treated like traditional public forums with no content-based discrimination allowed.

Non-public Forums

More restricted speech protections.

Content Neutral Analysis

Intermediate scrutiny criteria include content-neutral (Time/Place/Manner), narrowly tailored, serves significant government interest, leaves alternative communication channels.

Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum

Likely concerning government speech.

Prior Restraint

Government action that prohibits speech or other expression before it takes place. Prior restraints are generally disfavored under the First Amendment.

Actual Malice

The standard established in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, requiring public officials suing for libel to prove that the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for whether it was true or false.

Commercial Speech

Expression related solely to the economic interests of the speaker and its audience, often involving advertising or the promotion of products or services.

Content-Based Restriction

A limitation on speech based on the subject matter or viewpoint expressed. Such restrictions are generally subject to strict scrutiny.

Fighting Words

Speech that is likely to provoke a violent reaction when addressed to an ordinary citizen.

Imminent Lawless Action

Advocating the use of force or violence where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action (Brandenburg v. Ohio).

Mens Rea

A guilty mind; the mental state necessary to commit a crime.

Overbreadth

A doctrine invalidating laws that are so broadly written that they punish both constitutionally protected and unprotected conduct.

Public Figure/Official

Individuals who have achieved pervasive fame or notoriety, or who occupy positions of such power and influence that they are deemed public for all purposes, or those who have thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies to influence the resolution of the issues involved. These people are subject to a higher burden to bring a successful suit for defamation.

Recklessness

Disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk of which the person is aware.

Scienter

Knowledge or awareness, especially of the wrongfulness of one's actions.

Strict Scrutiny

The most stringent standard of judicial review, applied to laws that infringe on fundamental rights or discriminate against suspect classifications. The government must demonstrate that the law serves a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Four Privacy Torts

Legal claims that protect individuals from invasions of privacy.

Intrusion upon Seclusion

Invading someone's private space or affairs, must involve an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy. Defense: Newsworthiness and public interest.

Texas v. Johnson

Likely concerning symbolic speech and flag burning.

NY Times v. Sullivan

A case concerning libel and public officials, establishing key principles of First Amendment protections for public officials.

Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.

A case defining defamation standards and distinctions between public and private figures.

Defamation Defenses

Legal defenses against defamation claims, including truth, consent, absolute privilege, and qualified privilege.

Hustler v. Falwell

A case addressing emotional distress and parody, where the First Amendment protects parody publication.

Kasky v. Nike, Inc.

A case distinguishing commercial vs. noncommercial speech, focusing on Nike's statements about manufacturing conditions.

Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Service Commission

A case establishing that commercial speech is subject to intermediate First Amendment scrutiny.

Public Disclosure of Private Facts

Publishing private information not of legitimate public concern

Elements of Public Disclosure

Publication, private facts, offensive to reasonable person, not newsworthy

Sidis v. F-R Publishing

Case involving publicity of former child prodigy's private adult life

False Light

Placing someone in a false light in the public eye

Difference from Defamation

Differs from defamation as statement need not be defamatory, just misleading

Actual Malice

Requires showing of 'actual malice' for public figures

False Light Example

Using someone's image to illustrate a story unrelated to them

Appropriation/Right of Publicity

Using someone's name/likeness for commercial advantage

Celebrities' Claims

Celebrities have stronger claims under 'right of publicity'

Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting

Case involving human cannonball performance

Reporter's Privilege

Limited right of journalists to refuse to testify about information or sources

Shield Laws

State laws protecting journalists from being forced to disclose sources

Branzburg v. Hayes

Supreme Court ruled no absolute First Amendment privilege for reporters to refuse to testify before grand juries

Copyright Basics

Protects original works of authorship fixed in tangible medium

Copyright Duration

Life of author plus 70 years (corporate works: 95 years from publication)

Exclusive Rights

Reproduction, distribution, public display, derivative works