Question

directions use the information in your textbook to match each of these supreme court cases with a brief summary of the case. write the letter of the correct answer in the space provided.

1. new york times v. sullivan
2. bethel school district v. fraser
3. chaplinsky v. new hampshire
4. brandenburg v. ohio

a. a ku klux klan leader was arrested at a rally and cross - burning when he refused to end the rally. the court freed him, however, stating that advocating the use of force can’t be forbidden unless it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to produce such action.
b. the court ruled that the first amendment does not prevent school officials from suspending students for lewd or indecent speech at school events, although the same speech would be protected outside the school building.
c. the court decided that even if a newspaper story about an alabama police commissioner was false, it was protected speech unless the statement was made with the knowledge that it was false, or with reckless regard of whether it was false or not.
d. the court ruled that lewd and obscene, profane, libelous, and insulting words, which inflict injury and provoke a breach of the peace, are contrary to good order in society and are therefore not protected by the first amendment.

Explanation:

To solve this Supreme Court case matching problem, we analyze each case description and match it to the correct case:

1. New York Times v. Sullivan

• The description in option C is about a newspaper story (New York Times) and a ruling on libel/speech protection (holding that a false statement is protected unless made with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard). So 1. New York Times v. Sullivan matches C.

2. Bethel School District v. Fraser

• The description in option B is about school officials suspending students for lewd/indecent speech at school events (the Fraser case involved a student’s lewd speech at a school assembly). So 2. Bethel School District v. Fraser matches B.

3. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire

• The description in option D is about lewd, obscene, profane, libelous, or insulting words that breach peace (Chaplinsky involved a defendant’s insulting speech to a police officer, ruled unprotected). So 3. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire matches D.

4. Brandenburg v. Ohio

• The description in option A is about a Klan leader (Brandenburg) arrested at a rally, with the Court ruling advocacy of force is protected unless it incites “imminent lawless action.” So 4. Brandenburg v. Ohio matches A.

Answer:

s:

1. C
2. B
3. D
4. A