A Case Study of the Freedom of Speech and Expression in the Courts
Using the attached resource, provide a two page case study which examines freedom of speech and expression as they relate to the following two U.S.
Supreme Court case decisions:
Elonis v. United States
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.
Case study should be at least two pages not
including the title page and reference page and follow APA guidelines.
A Case Study of the Freedom of Speech and Expression in the Courts
Freedom of speech and expression are strongly protected by the provisions of the First Amendments Rights to US constitution, state, and federal laws. However, there are instances where these freedoms have been tested, whereby individuals exercising their First Amendment Rights have been held accountable. The First Amendment guarantees the freedoms regarding expression, speech, and religion, amongst others. There are instances when this exercise has cost individuals their freedoms and rights to employment. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), it declares that individuals have the right to freedom of expression. (Danieli, 2018) In the United States, it is safeguarded through the first amendment to the US constitution. This case study seeks to expound on the high court cases on Elonis v. the United States and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie &Fitch stores following their violations of these rights for both Elonis and Samantha Elauf while exercising their First Amendment rights.
With a particular focus on the case of Elonis v. the United States in 2015, Anthony Elonis was convicted to 44 months following his postings on Facebook that had been considered as threats. He posted had posted rap lyrics that appeared to threaten a kindergarten class, his wife, and local police. However, in his defense, he alludes that he had included disclaimers claiming that the post emulated lyrics from Eminem, the rap star, and he was within the protection of the First Amendment rights. However, the jury convicted him under the count of a reasonable person leading to his indictment on five accounts of threats. The jury claimed that he had violated the 1939 law whereby it is a federal crime to transmit interstate commerce by disseminating information containing a threat to harm another person (Barney, 2016). Following the conviction, Elonis made appeals to contest for his first amendment on the freedom of speech. The Supreme Court later overturned his conviction following chief justice Robert opinion concurring in part and dissenting, indicating that the law needed proof if the defendant intended to threaten, which lead to the reversed and remand of the 8-1 (Kaplan, 2016). The freedom of speech is protected within the rights of the fist amendments; however, it does not extend to true threats to the state or individuals. Despite the declaimer in his posting, his posts were claimed to cause fear and threats to a reasonable person even if the act was inadvertent.
The case of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch stores was another evident expression of the violation of freedom of speech. This was a case relating to Samantha Elauf, a Muslim American woman who had been denied to work at Fitch following the confliction of the company dress code to her religious dress code, in this case, the headscarf (King, 2016). The court ruled in her favor disbanding discrimination at workplaces based on one’s region. However, the decision was later reversed by the circuit courts of appeals when the company claimed that ELauf had not given the company detailed information on the need to wear the headscarf (De Carvalho Munoz, 2016).
In both of these cases, Justice Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas wrote opinions to challenge the violation of both the speech in Elonis and freedom in Elauf’s case. The respondent, in the case of ELaufs, had violated Title VII of the civil rights act which prohibits potential employers from refraining from hiring applicants based on their religious practices that were not accommodated for in the company (Danieli, 2018). They both suffered the cost of exercising their first amendment rights, the appeals made it possible to ensure that their rights were protected.
Conclusion
The concept of freedom of expression and speech may seem quite simple, but in the real sense, the delineation between the speeches protected in the First Amendment is complex. This freedom is limited only to the provisions of the first amendment rights; thus, the US Supreme Court has, over the years, tried to define the nature of speeches protected under the laws. It is imperative that while exercising their rights, be cautious to avoid crossing the line that prohibits the use of some posting. Additionally, several statutory bodies are helping fight against all forms of discrimination in the workplace to create a free and just society.
References
Barney, D. (2016). Elonis v. the United States: Why the Supreme Court Punted on Free Speech. Pepp. L. Rev., 44, 1
Danieli, Y., Stamatopoulou, E., & Dias, C. (2018). The universal declaration of human rights: Fifty years and beyond. Routledge.
De Carvalho Munoz, B. (2016). How Employers Can Reconcile the Tension between the Supreme Court’s Holding in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. and the EEOC’s Guidelines Relating to Pre-Employment Inquiries. Suffolk J. Trial & App. Advoc., 22, 355
Kaplan, J. P. (2016). Case report: Elonis v. United States. International Journal of Speech, Language & the Law, 23(2).
King, E. (2016). EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.: Religious Accommodation in the Workplace. Berkeley J. Emp. & Lab. L., 37, 327.
