Harry Kalven (1914–1974)
Auteur de A worthy tradition: Freedom of speech in America
A propos de l'auteur
Crédit image: from Concurringopinions.com
Œuvres de Harry Kalven
Oeuvres associées
Étiqueté
Partage des connaissances
- Date de naissance
- 1914-09-11
- Date de décès
- 1974-10-29
- Sexe
- male
- Lieu de naissance
- Chicago, Illinois, USA
- Études
- University of Chicago (BA 1935)
University of Chicago (JD 1938) - Professions
- lawyer
professor - Relations
- Kalven, Jamie (son)
Membres
Critiques
Vous aimerez peut-être aussi
Auteurs associés
Statistiques
- Œuvres
- 3
- Aussi par
- 1
- Membres
- 80
- Popularité
- #224,854
- Évaluation
- 4.0
- Critiques
- 2
- ISBN
- 6
It is interesting to note that more than 50% of all First Amendment cases since 1791 have been decided since 1959. Klavern argues the seminal case to be New York Times v Sullivan in which the court ruled that seditious libel; i.e. criticism of the government, cannot be made a crime in the United States thus effectively ruling unconstitutional the Sedition Act of 1798, not to mention the sedition laws used to imprison Abrams and his cohorts in 1919. Ironically, it was this latter case which provided Justice Holmes the opportunity to lay the groundwork for later free speech decisions in his famous defense of free speech in his dissent to Abrams v United States. In one of the more fascinating sections, Klavern discusses blasphemy and free speech. He observes that sacrilege, heresy and blasphemy are incompatible with the First Amendment, for as soon as the state decides what constitutes heresy it has essentially inserted itself in the religious debate and defined what is "correct" religion.
Epperson v Arkansas, a case overturning an anti-evolution statute in Arkansas in 1968, vividly made this point. The court based its decision not on whether evolution was correct or not. It simply stated that by denying that evolutionary theory be taught on the grounds that it was contrary to Biblical teaching, Arkansas was deciding what was false religious doctrine placing it squarely in opposition to the First Amendment. The state must not become the arbiter of falsity or truth in doctrinal matters. In fact government is forbidden by the First Amendment from preferring religion to non-religion, a position that most churches recognize as absolutely essential to the free
practice of religion.
I cannot do justice to the clarity and insights of this book. Its organization is such that it can be easily used as a reference in addition to simply good reading cover to cover. But have pencil and paper ready; you'll want to take notes.… (plus d'informations)