Blog Post #3 | Speech Theory

The eight values of free expression are the Marketplace of Ideas, Participation in Self-Government, Stable Change, Individual Self-Fulfillment, Check on Governmental Power, Promote Tolerance, Promote Innovation, and Protect Dissent. 

1) The Marketplace of Ideas promotes the idea that a published piece should not require a license or governmental approval to be published. John Milton brokered that concept in a pamphlet he published in 1644, protesting Parliament's requirement to approve and license all published books. This one is especially prevalent in the modern world today because everyone can publish or post something stating their opinion or take on a topic. 

For instance, someone could post a video on President Trump's inauguration without governmental approval or screening of the video. I believe this is a critical value because it allows people to practice their free speech without allowing the government to suppress them before they have publicly said something.

2) Participation in Self-Government is a concept where politicians and other governmental individuals need to be able to practice free speech in any form they choose. For example, the government should not be able to ban Instagram as a form of media for a politician to use to promote their ideals and beliefs. This is essential because it allows citizens to properly understand the individual they are supporting. It allows the public to understand the debate as a whole with nothing behind veils or blocked by restricted platform use. Politicians can use any form of media today to convey any message to get the public to support them, so this ideal is practiced.

3) Stable Change encourages upset and illegal citizens to practice free speech/venting because it keeps them from acting violently and allows for better moderation of groups that could threaten national security. By not suppressing citizens, they will speak their hearts and not act impulsively as much. If the government were to suppress upset citizens, there is a higher chance they would do something that can not be easily fixed. Additionally, if an upset or illegal citizen talks about the issues they are concerned about, there is a chance that they give some information regarding groups that harm the American population. Concerning angry people, this is happening because people are posting all over social media about their takes on political topics, especially since Trump has been re-elected. 

4) Individual Self-Fulfillment was brought up by C. Edwin Baker. He believed that individuals should be free to express themselves and create their identities. This idea is important to me because it reinforces the concept that America is a melting-pot country, a mix of cultures and identities. Additionally, it allows people to fully express themselves and live to be the individuals they want to be. Though this concept has its pitfalls, especially with generating some less-than-ideal personality traits in populations, then again it is better than suppression of being who you are. 

5) Check On Governmental Power is an important expression of freedom because it creates an advanced society that is accountable. If the public cannot keep the government in check then what keeps them from abusing their powers and making current issues, like poverty, worse. If the public can keep the government in check then a society can progress with a balance and serve as a model of inspiration for other countries worldwide.

6) Promote Tolerance is an interesting expression because it's not exactly something that would be encouraged outright. Promoting tolerance encourages things like hate speech because it generates tolerance and teaches individuals how to be patient and understanding. It hinges on the idea that a more tolerant society is a better society. 

I feel that the line of reasoning that a tolerant society is a better society is fair. I'm not sure if tolerating hate speech would be the way to go about it though. There are softer practices that promote understanding and forgiveness, but then again if a society can tolerate the worse practices it should encourage an advanced society.

7) Promote Innovation is the most important ideal to me. Allowing free speech encourages individualism, which leads to a creative, energized society. If free speech was suppressed, it would cause individuals to succumb to whatever is happening and not think for themselves, not express their ability to be free to create and do something original. If a society cannot be creative and original they are doomed to fail because they will not develop. An example of this could be the Soviet Union, which partially collapsed due to economic inequality and political corruption which was not being fixed.

8) Protect Dissent is a right all citizens have to disagree with a governmental body. Steve Shiffrin was a leading interpreter of the Constitution and its appeals, especially regarding the First Amendment. He believed that all citizens should have the right to dispute governmental opinion freely. This is an important ideal because it contributes to the Check On Governmental Power concept and The Marketplace of Ideas, it promotes individual thought that is not dependent on what the majority of people say. 

Blog Post #2 | The Founding Era of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court's process begins with a written petition to give judgment on a case. Cases come to the Supreme Court in the thousands. Nine Court Justices consider the case, from any kind of background. The Supreme Court serves as a model for other grand courts worldwide, but it exists as the strongest judicial power. "Their legitimacy is in the constitution, but their power relies on public faith in their independence and impartiality." It is their job to interpret the Constitution and uphold the rule of law based on their findings. 

When a new justice arrives, the Court's nine justices convene for a group photo. There have been just over one hundred Supreme Court justices in the U.S.'s history, serving an average of sixteen years. Being elected to the Supreme Court is a rare opportunity. They often convene to help determine the government's power, whether it be ruling it legal or not, in particular, controversial cases. 

When the government moved to Washington D.C. in 1801, John Marshall was elected Chief Justice. He is credited with giving the Supreme Court the ability to determine an act of Congress as unconstitutional. Under Marshal's leadership, the Court gained respect and was an effective tool in building the nation serving its place as a coequal branch of the government. 

After twenty years, a slave from Missouri, Dred Scott, attempted to claim his freedom by citing the Constitution, and the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had no power to ban slavery and slaves could never be citizens, which would lose much of that respect Marshal had worked hard to achieve. The Civil War helped resolve the issue of slavery, and the Dred Scott case is the Court's biggest self-inflicted wound. The Fourteenth Amendment would give all American citizens the right to due process of law and equal protection. 

In the modern day, the justices have two hundred years of history to reference and learn from to rule cases fairly. The Constitution we have today has survived through history and has been changed to embrace all American citizens, but it was not set to do that initially. The Court accepts about one hundred cases a year, and these cases are sent to justices every week. The Supreme Court looks to the other courts to determine if they've ruled properly based on Constitutional interpretations. Every week justices will convene to decide what cases they weigh in on. The Supreme Court has the right to not take cases, and determine if a case wasn't cared for properly.

When they debate what cases to choose, the Chief Justice first caps over the issues in the case and everyone contributes. The Court actively tries to improve itself, like how in recent years they've adopted a policy of letting everyone speak once before anyone speaks again. There has been a misconception that the Supreme Court can withhold information, but the entire branch is built on how there is no inside story. Everything is public information. "They (justices) have to wait for people to bring their problems to the Court." Unlike a senator or the President, the Supreme Court can't interpret the Constitution because they can, they have to have a case which causes them to interpret. 

The Supreme Court hears cases in public. Lawyers have thirty minutes to make their argument before the court, and the nine justices listen to that oral argument. The oral argument helps answer questions the briefs don't answer. Lawyers when presenting their argument need to remember they have a captive audience of justices for a half-hour and must not waste that vital time. The lawyer must be reactive, not sticking to a prepared script of how they want things to go. It is a different experience for professionals of law to be on the Supreme Court because they are presenting an argument to nine judges instead of one or two. A great luxury the Court has today is picking out the national concern a case has and finding a resolution to it. After a few days, the justices will convene alone and come to a conclusion about the case. 

After they've voted to decide the case, an individual justice on the majority side will write an opinion giving the legal reasons for the decision. Writing the opinion is the most time-consuming part of the justice's job because it's critical to helping other courts interpret the law correctly. Law clerks help with this process and the things that follow. The first draft takes about a month to develop. These drafts are sent to all nine justices to persuade the others to join that majority. 

As the justices announce their decision in the courtroom, other judicial staff push out the opinion to the press. Within hours or minutes, the public will discover what the Supreme Court had done regarding the case and its rulings. If the Supreme Court ever stopped defending the Constitution or if the people stopped listening to the Supreme Court, America would cease to be the freest nation in the world. "The power of the Court is the power of the trust earned...". 

A fun fact is that every time the justices meet they've adopted a tradition of shaking each justice's hands. I didn't know about that before, but I like how that encourages respect for each other. My biggest takeaway is that the Supreme Court has no power if it loses the trust of the people, which I think is good for accountability. The most surprising thing I learned was that the Supreme Court only accepts about one hundred cases a year. I thought it would be more, but in hindsight, that seems fair, especially with how long it takes to properly address a case. The video helped me gain a perspective that the Supreme Court is not for the government's benefit, but for the benefit of the people to hold the government responsible. 

Blog Post #1 TOP 5 SOURCES OF NEWS OR INFORMATION

 The first source I would refer to for information would be The Skimm. My 8th-grade civics teacher would do weekly tests on news going on in the world and she would use The Skimm articles for extra credit questions. I like it because if you subscribe, you will get a daily email from them going over the news in the world. Additionally, it is a pretty neutral news platform that will not spin information. Altogether, I like it as a news source because it sends daily, accurate news to my email & is a neutral news source. 

Unfortunately, my second news source is Instagram. While doom-scrolling, I often see news about things going on in the world. For example, I learned about the Californian wildfires and the havoc they have caused in the Los Angeles region. 

It isn't an amazing news source because anyone can put up any type of false information, but it is good at informing the general public of things. For that reason, I would make it my #2 news source because it's entertaining and it is good at making the public aware of world events

My third news source is CNN 10. Ironically, my 8th-grade civics teacher also had us watch 10-minute videos on world events, instead of extra-credit questions these would be the main questions.

I do not refer to these videos much because it has been a while, but I will say it is good information and it's presented in an entertaining format. If I remember correctly, it is also pretty politically neutral and I appreciate that. Altogether, I don't default to this news source because sometimes I do not feel like watching a 10-minute video just for random news, but I do appreciate it for what it is and it's entertaining. 

My fourth source of news is TED Talks. TED Talks are incredibly informative, and entertaining (depending on the topic), and provide great insight into what's happening in the world.

 TED Talks can be on broad sources of information, like the geo-political world, sciences, philosophies, psychologies, etc. TED talks can be on more scholarly subjects and provide factual insight into those subjects, which offers a nice break from regular news stations where things can get spun and viewed subjectively. Altogether, TED talks are a great form of understanding things that are happening in the world and they are very visual.

My final news source would be Microsoft News. I think it is incredibly convenient, especially since whenever you open the Microsoft browser it throws news articles and videos your way which can appeal. It can be overlooked since whenever someone opens the browser they are trying to do something, probably not browse through news, but still, it can have interesting titles and topics that are informative. Altogether, Microsoft News is a good news source because it's convenient and it has some interesting articles and videos to offer about events/subjects.