thesis statements about first amendment

91 First Amendment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best first amendment topic ideas & essay examples, 👍 good essay topics on first amendment, 🥇 interesting topics to write about first amendment, ❓ first amendment essay questions.

• Cyberbullying and the First Amendment Under the geographical approach, the defendant can argue that since the event in question occurs online and outside of school property, it is covered by the First Amendment and the school has “no authority to […]
• Violent Video Games and First Amendment Protection Violent games appear to be a legitimate type of media with its right for free expression; however, minors should also be protected from the violent and sexual content of video games because they lack media […] We will write a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts 808 writers online Learn More
• Analysis of the Case: Violation of the First Amendment History of the case: The candidate filed a lawsuit in the Maryland Circuit Court alleging violations of the First and 14th Amendments to the U.S.
• First Amendment: Religion and Education The right to education is protected by human rights legislation guaranteeing to adapt education to the requirements of individuals and communities that are evolving and to the needs of students in their varied socio-cultural contexts.
• Vaccination in the Context of the First Amendment The purpose of this paper is to review the dilemma in the context of the First Amendment and the free exercise of religion.
• The First Amendment: Free Speech and Education However, this is the case only “unless school authorities have reason to believe that such expression will substantially interfere with the work of the school or impinge upon the rights of other students”.
• Pornography or Obscenity and the First Amendment Amendment 1 of the US Constitution states that the “Congress will make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, […]
• The First Amendment – Religion and Expression In the ruling of Skokie case, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of the residents of Skokie, although it still allowed the planned marching by the NSP to go no.in this […]
• First Amendment Right of Free Speech in the USA In this case, it is seen that the Public Law of New Hampshire which bans under punishment “any offensive, derisive or annoying word to any other person who is lawfully in any street or other […]
• Free Speech in the First Amendment The first amendment of the Constitution states, “Congress will make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the […]
• Religious Establishment Clause of the First Amendment Therefore, based on the theoretical application of the Constitution, the chosen case violates the Religious Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S.
• First Amendment in the US Modern Justice System Also, the paper discusses the significance of the verdict passed by the Supreme Court in each case and their relevance or influence on the rights of American citizens today.
• Does Title VII Conflict With the First Amendment The government is not justified to disallow religious expression at workplaces by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Title VII statute and the First Amendment both provide protection for an employee’s religious rights.
• Founding Fathers Religion: The First Amendment Role in the Church-State Separation As a result, a resolute transformation from the Puritan Fathers in 1639, who uphold the religion as a foundation of any society, to the Founding Fathers in 1787, who accepted freedom of religion as an […]
• Journalism, the First Amendment and Egypt This essays suggests that the First Amendment freedom of the press clause has transcended its physical boundaries and now functions as a protective ideological bubble not only for American journalists but for journalists all over […]
• First Amendment: Commercial and Political Free Speech However, the degree to which the First Amendment protects commercial speech is not the same as that for other forms of speech protected by the Amendment.
• What the Founders Meant by the First Amendment? The first amendment was written over 200 years ago by the founders who wanted to protect both the State and religion from interfering in each others tasks.
• Free Speech: First Amendment Obscenity is one of the exceptions, according to the US Miller Test, obscenity is a test used by Supreme Court to determine if an expression or a speech can be termed obscene and whether it […]
• On the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution The freedom that Americans experience comes at a price because there are conflicts and problems that arise from the interpretation and implementation of the First Amendment, however, many legal experts are saying that it is […]
• The Free Exercise Thereof: Freedom of Religion in the First Amendment The Freedom of Religion clause in the First Amendment represents one of the few official documents on the planet that corroborates free will, specifically, the right to choose, in the arena of religion.
• US Constitution Reflections on the First Amendment Paper The first amendments made on the constitution of the United States of America in the year 1789 concerned the bill of rights.
• First Amendment Rights and Access to Opinions
• Censorship and the First Amendment: The American Citizen’s Right to Free Speech
• The First Amendment and Its Impact on Education
• Should the First Amendment Stop Protecting Hate Speech
• The First Amendment Speaks on the Freedoms of Religion
• Interpreting the First Amendment of the Constitution
• Should Racist Speech Enjoy Protection Under the First Amendment
• How the First Amendment Rights Have On Advancing Democracy
• The First Amendment and the Constitutional Freedoms in American Schools
• The First Amendment and Conservative Rulings of the Supreme Court
• Ever-Changing Freedoms: The First Amendment of the American Constitution and Challenges It Faces
• How the First Amendment Protects Freedom of Speech
• The First Amendment and Its Impact on Media
• Case Problems Involving the First Amendment
• The First Amendment and Its Legal Constrains
• Banning Books Goes Against the First Amendment
• Federal District Court Alleging First Amendment Violations
• The First Amendment and Label Drug Promotion
• Discussing Three Freedoms From the First Amendment
• The First Amendment and Its Impact on Language
• Public Safety Outweigh Petitioner’s First Amendment Right
• The Ambiguity and Confusion From the First Amendment
• The First Amendment and the American Judiciary
• Civil Rights and First Amendment
• Cyberbullying and the First Amendment
• Does the First Amendment Affect Your Livelihood
• The First Amendment and Right to Privacy
• Net Neutrality and the First Amendment: Who Has the Right to Free Speech
• Neo-Nazis and Their First Amendment Rights
• Public High School Students Have the First Amendment Right
• Espionage Act Conflicts First Amendment Rights in Wikileaks Case
• Comparing Our First Amendment Rights to the Rights of Those in George Orwell’s 1984
• The Role and Importance of the First Amendment of the Constitution
• First Amendment Rights and Pragmatic Solutions
• The First Amendment: History and Development
• First Amendment Rights, Privacy, and the Paparazzi
• The First Amendment Constitution on the Freedom of Expression
• The Relation Between the First Amendment and Music Censorship
• The First Amendment Anti-discrimination Law
• Does the First Amendment Protect False Campaign Speech
• What Is the Main Purpose of the First Amendment?
• How Free Speech Under the First Amendment Developed?
• What Is the Connection Between Anti-semitism and the First Amendment?
• Does Banning Books Violate the First Amendment?
• Was the First Amendment to the US Constitution Prohibition?
• What Are the First Amendment Issues?
• Does the First Amendment Guarantee the Right of American Citizens to Freedom?
• How Does Censorship Conflict With First Amendment Freedom of Speech?
• What Rights Does the First Amendment Guarantee to Citizens?
• Does the First Amendment Govern Cyberbullying?
• Did President Hoover Limit the First Amendment Rights of the Bonus Army?
• What Are the First Amendment Freedoms?
• Does the Espionage Act Conflict With First Amendment Rights?
• What Changes Did the First Amendment Make to the Constitution?
• How Does the First Amendment Guarantee Freedom of the Press?
• What Is the Significance of the First Amendment to Civil Society?
• What Is the Work of the First Amendment Committee?
• How Does the Supreme Court Interpret the First Amendment?
• What Religious Cases Does the First Amendment Control?
• How Are First Amendment Rights Applied and Limited?
• Does the First Amendment to the US Constitution Regulate Ever-Changing Freedoms?
• How Do First Amendment Rights Affect the Development of Democracy?
• What Is the Interpretation of the First Amendment to the Constitution?
• Does the First Amendment Affect Your Livelihood?
• Does the First Amendment Limit the Government’s Power?
• What Inappropriate Words Should Be Removed From the First Amendment?
• Does Public Safety Override a Plaintiff’s First Amendment Right?
• Should Rap Songs Be Protected by the First Amendment?
• Does the First Amendment Protect False Campaign Speech?
• Should Racist Speech Enjoy Protection Under the First Amendment?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 24). 91 First Amendment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/first-amendment-essay-topics/

"91 First Amendment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 24 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/first-amendment-essay-topics/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '91 First Amendment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 24 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "91 First Amendment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/first-amendment-essay-topics/.

1. IvyPanda . "91 First Amendment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/first-amendment-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "91 First Amendment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." February 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/first-amendment-essay-topics/.

• Constitution Research Ideas
• Bill of Rights Research Ideas
• Fifth Amendment Essay Ideas
• Censorship Essay Ideas
• Fourth Amendment Essay Topics
• Electoral College Research Topics
• Freedom Of Expression Questions
• US History Topics
• Freedom of Speech Ideas
• Sixth Amendment Topics
• Freedom Topics
• Tolerance Essay Ideas
• Civil Law Paper Topics
• Human Rights Essay Ideas
• Media Bias Questions

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Law

First Amendment Essay Examples

The First Amendment is one of the most important amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and it guarantees several fundamental rights, including the freedom of speech, religion, assembly, and the press. Writing a 1st Amendment essay can be a great way to explore the significance of these rights and their impact on American society.

When writing an essay on First Amendment, thesis statement is an important part to pay special attention to as it reflects your perspective on the topic. Your thesis should outline the main points you’ll be discussing in your essay, and it should be supported by evidence and examples.

A well-written First Amendment essay should demonstrate your understanding of this essential constitutional provision and its impact on American life. By exploring the history and significance of the First Amendment, you can gain a deeper appreciation for the freedoms that are so vital to our democracy.

If you’re looking for First Amendment essay examples, WritingBros can help you get started. In this section you can find essays on different topics related to this broad theme, such as the history of the 1st Amendment, its impact on American politics and culture, and its relationship to other constitutional rights, as well as many others.

The Freedom Of Religion And Why Is The First Amendment Important

First Amendment “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of...

• American Constitution
• First Amendment

Life Without The First Amendment 

My, I and my family would be one of many who would be hugely impacted if our 1st amendment freedom of religion was taken away. We are one of Jehovah's Witnesses and there are currently 13,036 congregations (or places of worship) around the country. In...

First Amendment Cases: Clear And Present Danger

The First Amendment expresses that Congress will make no law regarding a foundation of religion, or forbidding the free exercise of; or compressing the ability to speak freely, of the press; or the privilege of the individuals quietly to collect, and to appeal to the...

A Case Study of the American Right to the Freedom of Speech

One of our rights in the United States is freedom of speech, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, “...prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on...

• Freedom of Speech

The Importance of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Thesis statement The first amendment is important because it does not let the government arrest you for expressing your beliefs because it is a right given by God to protect the people. Amendment I Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or...

• Constitution

Stressed out with your paper?

Consider using writing assistance:

• 100% unique papers
• 3 hrs deadline option

First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Facts About It

The First Amendment is represented and interpreted differently by the American people, the judicial branch, and state governments. What is the First Amendment? It is an amendment that gives the right to American citizens to have freedom of assembly, press, religion, and speech. This is...

• Role of Government

Protection of Free Speech As Seen in the First Amendment

The First Amendment, proposed in 1789 by declared ‘Father of the Constitution’ James Madison as part of the U.S. Bill of Rights has perpetuated itself as a fundamental component in the governing and ruling of America to this day, acting as a principal reference point...

• Free Speech
• Mccarthyism

Best topics on First Amendment

1. The Freedom Of Religion And Why Is The First Amendment Important

2. Life Without The First Amendment 

3. First Amendment Cases: Clear And Present Danger

4. A Case Study of the American Right to the Freedom of Speech

5. The Importance of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

6. First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Facts About It

7. Protection of Free Speech As Seen in the First Amendment

• Capital Punishment
• Social Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminal Law
• Money Laundering

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Explore the Constitution

• The Constitution
• Read the Full Text

Dive Deeper

Constitution 101 course.

• The Drafting Table
• Supreme Court Cases Library
• Founders' Library
• Constitutional Rights: Origins & Travels

Start your constitutional learning journey

• News & Debate Overview
• Constitution Daily Blog
• America's Town Hall Programs
• Special Projects

Media Library

America’s Town Hall

Watch videos of recent programs.

• Education Overview

Constitution 101 Curriculum

• Classroom Resources by Topic
• Classroom Resources Library
• Live Online Events
• Professional Learning Opportunities
• Constitution Day Resources

Explore our new 15-unit high school curriculum.

• Explore the Museum
• Plan Your Visit
• Exhibits & Programs
• Field Trips & Group Visits
• Host Your Event
• Buy Tickets

New exhibit

The first amendment, module 10: the first amendment.

The First Amendment protects some of our most cherished rights, including religious liberty, free speech, a free press, the right to assemble, and the right to petition our government for a redress of grievances. Together, these essential rights are connected to the freedom of conscience—protecting our ability to think as we will and speak as we think. As we examine the First Amendment’s text and history, we will explore debates over the First Amendment’s five freedoms, analyze landmark Supreme Court cases, and examine how the First Amendment has been used by groups of all perspectives to promote their vision of a more perfect Union.

Download all materials for this module as a PDF

Learning Objectives

• Identify the five freedoms protected by the First Amendment.
• Discuss the First Amendment’s speech-protective rule.
• Examine contexts in which the government has some additional leeway to regulate speech.
• Analyze the First Amendment’s religion clauses and explore how the Supreme Court has interpreted them over time.
• Explore landmark free speech and press cases and examine famous quotes. 
• Examine historical examples of different people and groups asserting their petition and assembly rights and reflect on the methods available to you today.

10.1 Activity: Five Freedoms

• Student Instructions
• Teacher Notes

Purpose In this activity, you will discuss the five freedoms enshrined in the First Amendment.

Process As a class, list the first words that come to mind when you hear the words “First Amendment.” What freedoms are enshrined in it?

Read the text of the Primary Source: First Amendment as a class and identify the five freedoms. Highlight, circle, and label the key freedoms and key information along with your classmates.

Your teacher will lead you through a discussion on the First Amendment as a group.

In small groups answer the following questions: 

• Why do you think that these five freedoms were included in the First Amendment? Why are they important? Why might the Founding generation have valued them? Are there any principles (or broader theories) that connect the First Amendment’s five freedoms?
• How does each freedom offer something distinct?
• How do these freedoms overlap and/or reinforce one another?
• What are some ways that you might exercise your First Amendment freedoms today?

Be prepared to discuss your answer as a class.

Launch Begin by asking students what they know about the First Amendment and what freedoms are in it. Next, display the First Amendment’s text or provide copies for all students to view. Read the words out loud. 

The First Amendment  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

As a class, have the students identify the five freedoms, circle them, and label them for the whole group. 

Guiding Question:

• What freedoms are in the First Amendment?

Discuss examples of how someone might exercise their First Amendment rights. This does not have to be exact, and some informal examples are great, as well. Possible examples: 

• I don’t agree with the time my school starts, and I speak up at a school board meeting. 
• I have a different place to worship than my friends do, or I don’t go to a place of worship at all. 
• I am going to start my own blog to discuss changes I want to see in Congress. 
• Our courthouse does not allow skateboarders. I am going to write a letter and then protest.

Activity Synthesis In small groups, have students reflect on why the First Amendment’s five freedoms are grouped together. Highlight any comments that identify the freedom of belief, expression, or conscience. Talk about how these five freedoms give us all the right to develop our own ideas (and cultivate our own beliefs); worship (or not) freely; communicate our ideas to other people; get together with others to discuss issues, plan activities, and engage in expressive acts like protests and parades; and petition the government. Throughout American history, many of these First Amendment rights have often been important to unpopular groups, those representing minority groups with little political power or voice from all perspectives.

Guiding Questions:

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of the five freedoms protected by the First Amendment, ask them what would happen if these freedoms were not protected by the Constitution? What are some of the dangers?

10.1 Primary Source: First Amendment

This activity is part of Module 10: The First Amendment from the Constitution 101 Curriculum

10.2 Video Activity: Big Ideas Behind the First Amendment

Purpose In this activity, you will learn more about the big ideas behind the First Amendment.

Process Watch the following video about the First Amendment.

Then, complete the Video Reflection: The First Amendment worksheet.

Identify any areas that are unclear to you or where you would like further explanation. Be prepared to discuss your answers in a group and to ask your teacher any remaining questions.

Launch Have students watch the video, answer the questions, and complete the Video Reflection: The First Amendment worksheet.  The goal is to make sure the students understand these four key principles of the First Amendment:

• Freedom of conscience is an unalienable right because people have the right and duty to think for themselves.
• Free speech makes representatives accountable to “We the People.”
• Free speech is necessary for the discovery of truth and the rejection of falsehood.
• Free speech allows the public discussion necessary for democratic self-government.

Activity Synthesis Engage in a classroom discussion on how free speech and religion, assembly and petition are all connected to the overarching idea of the Freedom of Conscience. Why is it so important for us to exercise our freedom to think? How are we as members of this democracy engaging in this practice in our lives? How do we stretch our perspectives by exposing ourselves to others' ideas and other viewpoints?

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of the freedom of conscience, ask the students to examine your own school or community. How much diversity of thought is in your after school clubs, community centers, or even in the choices of books in your local library. Write a short review of our community’s freedom of conscience. 

10.2 Video Reflection: The First Amendment

10.3 activity: religion clauses.

Purpose The First Amendment has two clauses related to religion: one preventing the government establishment of religion (the Establishment Clause) and the other protecting the ability to freely exercise religious beliefs (the Free Exercise Clause). In this activity, you will review these clauses, why they were included in the Bill of Rights, the issues they address, and how the Supreme Court has interpreted them over time. 

Process Read your assigned interpretations:

• Text of the Constitution
• Common Interpretation: The Establishment Clause
• Common Interpretation: Free Exercise Clause

Complete the Activity Guide: Religion Clause s worksheet. Your teacher will lead you in a group, explain your assigned clause, and build a deeper understanding of both clauses and how they work together or in conflict with one another. 

Finally, as a class read Info Brief: Kennedy v. Bremerton School District Case then join in a group discussion on modern cases today and constitutional hypotheticals . 

Launch Divide the class into small groups of 3-4 and assign half the groups to read the Establishment Clause Common Interpretation Essay and the other half of the groups will read the Free Exercise Clause Common Interpretation Essay. Students will work in groups to complete the worksheet and prepare to share a summary.

Activity Synthesis Jigsaw the groups, have them share their summaries and collectively identify the big idea behind each clause, then discuss as a class. Questions include:

• How do the big ideas found in the essays connect or compare to one or all of the four big ideas from the video?
• How are these two clauses in the Constitution at odds? Can you give examples?
• What modern cases have come to light that are testing one or both of these clauses?

Large Group Discussion: Hypos This is a great class to engage in hypotheticals and a civil dialogue. After students complete the sections up to this part, engage in a large class discussion on the following constitutional question presented in the Kennedy case.  Assign students to read about Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. Then lead a discussion with the following hypothetical questions. This is a great opportunity to explore discussion methods that allow for student voice and agency with techniques like the Fishbowl method or the Harkness method. See the Civil Dialogue Toolkit for more tools to build this skill. 

Kennedy Case Scenario(s) :  

• Under this ruling, can a teacher give a brief, silent prayer before eating a snack at the front of the classroom? 
• What if the teacher prays aloud?
• What if the students are not in the classroom?
• What if a group of students stopped back in the classroom during recess?
• What if the teacher invites students to join the teacher in prayer on a voluntary basis?
• What if students join the teacher voluntarily without the teacher asking them? Can they join the teacher? Does the teacher have a constitutional obligation to tell them not to join?
• What if the teacher prays in the teachers lounge?
• Does the age of the students and/or audience affect how you consider these hypotheticals? 

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of the religion clauses of the First Amendment, answer the following questions: 

• Why did the Founding generation include the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause in the Bill of Rights? 
• How have the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause shaped the role of religion in our government and society over time? 

10.3 Info Brief: Kennedy v. Bremerton School District Case

10.3 activity guide: religion clauses, 10.4 activity: speech quotation analysis.

Purpose In this activity, you will examine free speech quotes from landmark Supreme Court cases and compare them to the big ideas shared in the video. 

Process For background on the legal framework for analyzing First Amendment Speech and Press Clauses, read the following interpretation:

First Amendment: Speech Clause and the Press Clause

• Common Interpretation

Analyze the First Amendment Quotes provided to you and explore longer excerpts in the Founders’ Library to better understand the context for them and the development of free speech and a free press in America.  

In your group, complete the following tasks on the Activity Guide: Speech Quotation Analysis worksheet.

• Define any words that you do not understand.
• Summarize each quotation and write one to two sentences explaining it in your own words.
• Explain how the quote connects to the broader conclusion that the Supreme Court reached in the case.

Think about the big ideas from the First Amendment instructional video. Draw any connections to the four First Amendment principles highlighted in the video. Explain the connections.

As a reminder, here are the four big ideas:

Be prepared to share key point(s) and draw connections to what you explored in the videos and primary sources. 

Launch Divide the class into groups prior to class and have them complete the readings.

Students will analyze the quotations supplied and explore longer excerpts in the Founders’ Library to better understand it in the context of free speech over time in America. Teachers can project the quote on the board for all to view and/or provide students with a copy of the First Amendment Quotes handout. Using the provided Activity Guide: Speech Quotation Analysis worksheet, students will share key points of the longer excerpts with their classmates and draw connections to what they explored in the videos and primary sources from each group that were examined.   

• Schenck v. United States (1919)
• Abrams v. United States (1919)
• West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)
• New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)
• Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
• Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)
• New York Times Co. v. United States (1971) (The Pentagon Papers Case)
• Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)
• Texas v. Johnson (1989)

Activity Synthesis The Founding generation believed that

“freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government.”

Justice Brandeis, Whitney v. California

Ask students the following questions:

• Why does the First Amendment protect free speech and a free press?
• How does free speech ensure democratic self-governance?
• How does this quote relate to Justice Holmes’s account of a “marketplace of ideas” and its importance to free speech?
• Are you persuaded by Brandeis and Holmes? What are the strengths of their visions? What are the weaknesses?
• Does free speech promote tolerance? Why or why not?
• How does social media influence your assessment of the First Amendment visions of Holmes and Brandeis?

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of the First Amendment’s protections for free speech and a free press, ask the following question:

• When does the government have greater leeway to regulate speech? Hint: Check out the Common Interpretation essay on Freedom of Speech and Press .

10.4 Activity Guide: Speech Quotation Analysis

10.4 first amendment quotes, 10.5 activity: assembly and petition.

Purpose But wait, there is more in the First Amendment! The First Amendment also protects the right to assemble and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. These are two distinct rights. First, the right to assemble protects our right to gather together with others in groups—whether as part of a political meeting, religious gathering, street protest, or parade. And second, the right to petition goes to our right to join together with others to share our collective views with the government—often by highlighting problems and suggesting ways of fixing them. 

Process Examine the primary source assigned to you and your partner, and complete the Activity Guide: Assembly and Petition worksheet. 

Review your responses with a classmate who examined the same primary source and be prepared to share with your class the connection to assembly and petition.

Launch Break students into pairs and assign each team a primary source. Have each student examine the primary source and then discuss with their partner and complete the worksheet.  Information Sheet With All Excerpts:

• Petition from the Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery to the First Congress (1790).
• The Gag Rules Debate (1835-1840).
• Seneca Falls Declaration (1848).
• Proceedings of the State Convention of Colored People, Held at Albany, New York (1851).
• Frederick Douglass, Plea for Freedom of Speech in Boston (1860).

Activity Synthesis Once each team has completed the worksheet, have them share with the larger group some key concepts from the reading.

• Identify the author(s) and year.
• Answer how the author(s) use assembly or petition rights to promote change.
• Describe the types of changes the author(s) advocate.
• Cite 1-2 quotes as evidence for the argument. Why did you pick these two?

Note for the class when there are similarities between groups that had the same primary source and differences. 

Ask students if they can find any connections between these sources and a modern day debate in our country.   Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of assembly and petition, ask students to explore news articles or segments in media that present the Assembly Clause in action. Is it presented as negative or positive? What was the group and what was their main message? What part of the government were they appealing to? 

10.5 Activity Guide: Assembly and Petition

10.5 primary source: frederick douglass, plea for freedom of speech in boston (1860), 10.5 primary source: petition from the pennsylvania society for the abolition of slavery to the first congress (1790), 10.5 primary source: proceedings of the state convention of colored people, held at albany, new york (1851), 10.5 primary source: seneca falls declaration (1848), 10.5 primary source: the gag rules debate (1835-1840), 10.6 activity: exit ticket reflection.

Process To complete this module, write a short paragraph about free speech as it relates to social media and be prepared to share it in class.

Remember the rule from Brandenburg v. Ohio : Generally speaking, the government may punish if it is intended to and likely to cause imminent lawless action. In this activity, you will reflect on whether such a speech-protective rule works in the age of social media.

Read this article from The Atlantic by Jeffrey Rosen: Elon Musk Is Right That Twitter Should Follow the First Amendment .

Write a short paragraph in response to the following question: Do you think that social media companies should follow the same guidelines of the First Amendment as the government does? As a reminder, social media companies do not have to follow standard First Amendment rules because the First Amendment only applies to the government, not to private companies, which can create their own guidelines or policies with respect to how their platform is used and how their business is run. List three pros and three cons as part of your short paragraph response.

10.7 Test Your Knowledge

Congratulations for completing the activities in this module! Now it’s time to apply what you have learned about the basic ideas and concepts covered.

Complete the questions to test your knowledge.

This activity will help students determine their overall understanding of module concepts. It is recommended that questions are completed electronically so immediate feedback is provided, but a downloadable copy of the questions (with answer key) is also available.

10.7 Interactive Knowledge Check: First Amendment: Speech, Press, Religion, Assembly, and Petition

10.7 printable knowledge check: first amendment: speech, press, religion, assembly, and petition, previous module, module 9: the judicial system and current cases, next module, module 11: the fourth amendment.

The Fourth Amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizures of our person, our house, our papers, and our effects. In many cases, this amendment governs our interactions with the police. Before the government—including police officers—can search your home or seize your property, it needs a good reason. This is the big idea behind the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. The government needs particularized suspicion—a reason that’s specific to each suspect—before it can get a warrant. Broadly speaking, our Constitution says that the police s...

Go to the Next Module

More from the National Constitution Center

Constitution 101

Explore our new 15-unit core curriculum with educational videos, primary texts, and more.

Search and browse videos, podcasts, and blog posts on constitutional topics.

Founders’ Library

Discover primary texts and historical documents that span American history and have shaped the American constitutional tradition.

Modal title

Modal body text goes here.

Share with Students

First Amendment :

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, 1 Footnote U.S. Const. amend. I . viewed broadly, protects religious liberty and rights related to freedom of speech. Specifically, the Religion Clauses prevent the government from adopting laws “respecting an establishment of religion” —the Establishment Clause—or “prohibiting the free exercise thereof” —the Free Exercise Clause. The First Amendment also expressly protects the freedoms of speech, press, peaceable assembly, and petition to the Government.

The Constitution Annotated essays discussing the First Amendment begin with the Religion Clauses, reviewing the history of these clauses before explaining, in turn, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. The Religion Clause section ends with an essay exploring the relationship between the Religion Clauses and the Free Speech Clause. The Constitution Annotated then turns to this latter clause, discussing interpretations of the Free Speech Clause before describing Supreme Court cases recognizing constitutional protections for freedom of association. Next, the Constitution Annotated explains the Free Press Clause. The First Amendment essays end by discussing the clauses protecting the freedoms of assembly and petition.

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

First Amendment

By: History.com Editors

Updated: July 27, 2023 | Original: December 4, 2017

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the freedom of speech, religion and the press. It also protects the right to peaceful protest and to petition the government. The amendment was adopted in 1791 along with nine other amendments that make up the Bill of Rights—a written document protecting civil liberties under U.S. law. The meaning of the First Amendment has been the subject of continuing interpretation and dispute over the years. Landmark Supreme Court cases have dealt with the right of citizens to protest U.S. involvement in foreign wars, flag burning and the publication of classified government documents.

Bill of Rights

During the summer of 1787, a group of politicians, including James Madison and Alexander Hamilton , gathered in Philadelphia to draft a new U.S. Constitution .

Antifederalists, led by the first governor of Virginia , Patrick Henry , opposed the ratification of the Constitution. They felt the new constitution gave the federal government too much power at the expense of the states. They further argued that the Constitution lacked protections for people’s individual rights.

The debate over whether to ratify the Constitution in several states hinged on the adoption of a Bill of Rights that would safeguard basic civil rights under the law. Fearing defeat, pro-constitution politicians, called Federalists , promised a concession to the antifederalists—a Bill of Rights.

James Madison drafted most of the Bill of Rights. Madison was a Virginia representative who would later become the fourth president of the United States. He created the Bill of Rights during the 1st United States Congress, which met from 1789 to 1791 – the first two years that President George Washington was in office.

The Bill of Rights, which was introduced to Congress in 1789 and adopted on December 15, 1791, includes the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

First Amendment Text

The First Amendment text reads:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

While the First Amendment protected freedoms of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition, subsequent amendments under the Bill of Rights dealt with the protection of other American values including the Second Amendment right to bear arms and the Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury.

Freedom of Speech

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech . Freedom of speech gives Americans the right to express themselves without having to worry about government interference. It’s the most basic component of freedom of expression.

The U.S. Supreme Court often has struggled to determine what types of speech is protected. Legally, material labeled as obscene has historically been excluded from First Amendment protection, for example, but deciding what qualifies as obscene has been problematic. Speech provoking actions that would harm others—true incitement and/or threats—is also not protected, but again determining what words have qualified as true incitement has been decided on a case-by-case basis.

Freedom of the Press

This freedom is similar to freedom of speech, in that it allows people to express themselves through publication.

There are certain limits to freedom of the press . False or defamatory statements—called libel—aren’t protected under the First Amendment.

Freedom of Religion

The First Amendment, in guaranteeing freedom of religion , prohibits the government from establishing a “state” religion and from favoring one religion over any other.

While not explicitly stated, this amendment establishes the long-established separation of church and state.

Right to Assemble, Right to Petition

The First Amendment protects the freedom to peacefully assemble or gather together or associate with a group of people for social, economic, political or religious purposes. It also protects the right to protest the government.

The right to petition can mean signing a petition or even filing a lawsuit against the government.

First Amendment Court Cases

Here are landmark Supreme Court decisions related to the First Amendment.

Free Speech &  Freedom of the Press :

Schenck v. United States , 1919: In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Socialist Party activist Charles Schenck after he distributed fliers urging young men to dodge the draft during World War I .

The Schenck decision helped define limits of freedom of speech, creating the “clear and present danger” standard, explaining when the government is allowed to limit free speech. In this case, the Supreme Court viewed draft resistance as dangerous to national security.

New York Times Co. v. United States , 1971: This landmark Supreme Court case made it possible for The New York Times and Washington Post newspapers to publish the contents of the Pentagon Papers without risk of government censorship.

The Pentagon Papers were a top-secret Department of Defense study of U.S. political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. Published portions of the Pentagon Papers revealed that the presidential administrations of Harry Truman , Dwight D. Eisenhower , John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson had all misled the public about the degree of U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

Texas v. Johnson , 1990: Gregory Lee Johnson, a youth communist, burned a flag during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas to protest the administration of President Ronald Reagan .

The Supreme Court reversed a Texas court’s decision that Johnson broke the law by desecrating the flag. This Supreme Court Case invalidated statutes in Texas and 47 other states prohibiting flag-burning.

Freedom of Religion:

Reynolds v. United States (1878): This Supreme Court case upheld a federal law banning polygamy, testing the limits of religious liberty in America. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment forbids government from regulating belief but not from actions such as marriage.

Braunfeld v. Brown (1961): The Supreme Court upheld a Pennsylvania law requiring stores to close on Sundays, even though Orthodox Jews argued the law was unfair to them since their religion required them to close their stores on Saturdays as well.

Sherbert v. Verner (1963): The Supreme Court ruled that states could not require a person to abandon their religious beliefs in order to receive benefits. In this case, Adell Sherbert, a Seventh-day Adventist, worked in a textile mill. When her employer switched from a five-day to six-day workweek, she was fired for refusing to work on Saturdays. When she applied for unemployment compensation, a South Carolina court denied her claim.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971): This Supreme Court decision struck down a Pennsylvania law allowing the state to reimburse Catholic schools for the salaries of teachers who taught in those schools. This Supreme Court case established the “Lemon Test” for determining when a state or federal law violates the Establishment Clause—that’s the part of the First Amendment that prohibits the government from declaring or financially supporting a state religion.

Ten Commandments Cases (2005): In 2005, the Supreme Court came to seemingly contradictory decisions in two cases involving the display of the Ten Commandments on public property. In the first case, Van Orden v. Perry , the Supreme Court ruled that the display of a six-foot Ten Commandments monument at the Texas State Capital was constitutional. In McCreary County v. ACLU , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that two large, framed copies of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky courthouses violated the First Amendment.

Right to Assemble & Right to Petition:

NAACP v. Alabama (1958): When Alabama Circuit Court ordered the NAACP to stop doing business in the state and subpoenaed the NAACP for records including their membership list, the NAACP brought the matter to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in favor of the NAACP, which Justice John Marshall Harlan II writing: “This Court has recognized the vital relationship between freedom to associate and privacy in one's associations.”

Edwards v. South Carolina (1962): On March 2, 1961, 187 Black students marched from Zion Baptist Church to the South Carolina State House, where they were arrested and convicted of breaching the peace. The Supreme Court ruled in an 8-1 decision to reverse the convictions, arguing that the state infringed on the free speech, free assembly and freedom to petition of the students.

The Bill of Rights; White House . History of the First Amendment; The University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Schenck v. United States ; C-Span .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

ALA User Menu

• ALA Websites

Breadcrumb navigation

• Contact Congress

First Amendment and Censorship

• Share This Page

First Amendment Resources | Statements & Core Documents | Publications & Guidelines

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791.

One of the ten amendments of the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment gives everyone residing in the United States the right to hear all sides of every issue and to make their own judgments about those issues without government interference or limitations. The First Amendment allows individuals to speak, publish, read and view what they wish, worship (or not worship) as they wish, associate with whomever they choose, and gather together to ask the government to make changes in the law or to correct the wrongs in society.

The right to speak and the right to publish under the First Amendment has been interpreted widely to protect individuals and society from government attempts to suppress ideas and information, and to forbid government censorship of books, magazines, and newspapers as well as art, film, music and materials on the internet. The Supreme Court and other courts have held conclusively that there is a First Amendment right to receive information as a corollary to the right to speak. Justice William Brennan elaborated on this point in 1965:

“The protection of the Bill of Rights goes beyond the specific guarantees to protect from Congressional abridgment those equally fundamental personal rights necessary to make the express guarantees fully meaningful.I think the right to receive publications is such a fundamental right.The dissemination of ideas can accomplish nothing if otherwise willing addressees are not free to receive and consider them. It would be a barren marketplace of ideas that had only sellers and no buyers.” Lamont v. Postmaster General , 381 U.S. 301 (1965).

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the right to receive information is a fundamental right protected under the U.S. Constitution when it  considered whether a local school board violated the Constitution by removing books from a school library.  In that decision, the Supreme Court held that “the right to receive ideas is a necessary predicate to the recipient’s meaningful exercise of his own rights of speech, press, and political freedom.” Board of Education v. Pico , 457 U.S. 853 (1982)

Public schools and public libraries, as public institutions, have been the setting for legal battles about student access to books, the removal or retention of “offensive” material, regulation of patron behavior, and limitations on public access to the internet. Restrictions and censorship of materials in public institutions are most commonly prompted by public complaints about those materials and implemented by government officials mindful of the importance some of their constituents may place on religious values, moral sensibilities, and the desire to protect children from materials they deem to be offensive or inappropriate. Directly or indirectly, ordinary individuals are the driving force behind the challenges to the freedom to access information and ideas in the library.

The First Amendment prevents public institutions from compromising individuals' First Amendment freedoms by establishing a framework that defines critical rights and responsibilities regarding free expression and the freedom of belief.  The First Amendment protects the right to exercise those freedoms, and it advocates respect for the right of others to do the same. Rather than engaging in censorship and repression to advance one's values and beliefs, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis counsels persons living in the United States to resolve their differences in values and belief by resort to "more speech, not enforced silence." 

By virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech and intellectual freedom also applies to state and local governments.  Government agencies and government officials are forbidden from regulating or restricting speech or other expression based on its content or viewpoint. Criticism of the government, political dissatisfaction, and advocacy of unpopular ideas that people may find distasteful or against public policy are nearly always protected by the First Amendment.  Only that expression that is shown to belong to a few narrow categories of speech is not protected by the First Amendment.  The categories of unprotected speech include obscenity, child pornography, defamatory speech, false advertising, true threats, and fighting words.  Deciding what is and is not protected speech is reserved to courts of law.

The First Amendment only prevents government restrictions on speech.  It does not prevent restrictions on speech imposed by private individuals or businesses.  Facebook and other social media can regulate or restrict speech hosted on their platforms because they are private entities. 

First Amendment Resources

Clauses of the First Amendment | The National Constitution Center

First Amendment FAQ | Freedom Forum

Freedom of Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, and Petition: Common Interpretations and Matters for Debate | National Constitution Center

First Amendment - Religion and Expression | FindLaw

What is Censorship?

Censorship is the suppression of ideas and information that some individuals, groups, or government officials find objectionable or dangerous.  Would-be censors try to use the power of the state to impose their view of what is truthful and appropriate, or offensive and objectionable, on everyone else. Censors pressure public institutions, like libraries, to suppress and remove information they judge inappropriate or dangerous from public access, so that no one else has the chance to read or view the material and make up their own minds about it. The censor wants to prejudge materials for everyone.  It is no more complicated than someone saying, “Don’t let anyone read this book, or buy that magazine, or view that film, because I object to it!”

“Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.” — Article 3, Library Bill of Rights

ALA Statements and Policies on Censorship

Challenged Resources: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights (2019) A challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials, based upon the objections of a person or group. A banning is the removal of those materials. Challenges do not simply involve a person expressing a point of view; rather, they are an attempt to remove material from the curriculum or library, thereby restricting the access of others. ALA declares as a matter of firm principle that it is the responsibility of every library to have a clearly defined written policy for collection development that includes a procedure for review of challenged resources.

Labeling Systems: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights (2015) The American Library Association affirms the rights of individuals to form their own opinions about resources they choose to read, view, listen to, or otherwise access. Libraries do not advocate the ideas found in their collections or in resources accessible through the library. The presence of books and other resources in a library does not indicate endorsement of their contents by the library. Likewise, providing access to digital information does not indicate endorsement or approval of that information by the library. Labeling systems present distinct challenges to these intellectual freedom principles.

Rating Systems: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights (2019) Libraries, no matter their size, contain an enormous wealth of viewpoints and are responsible for making those viewpoints available to all. However, libraries do not advocate or endorse the content found in their collections or in resources made accessible through the library. Rating systems appearing in library public access catalogs or resource discovery tools present distinct challenges to these intellectual freedom principles. Q&A on Labeling and Rating Systems

Expurgation of Library Materials: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights (2014) Expurgating library materials is a violation of the Library Bill of Rights. Expurgation as defined by this interpretation includes any deletion, excision, alteration, editing, or obliteration of any part(s) of books or other library resources by the library, its agent, or its parent institution (if any).

Restricted Access to Library Materials: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights (2014) Libraries are a traditional forum for the open exchange of information. Attempts to restrict access to library materials violate the basic tenets of the Library Bill of Rights.

Complete list of Library Bill of Rights Interpretations

Core Documents

Library Bill of Rights (1939) Adopted by ALA Council, the Articles of the Library Bill of Rights are unambiguous statements of basic principles that should govern the service of all libraries. ( printable pamphlets )

Freedom to Read Statement (1953) A collaborative statement by literary, publishing, and censorship organizations declaring the importance of our constitutionally protected right to access information and affirming the need for our professions to oppose censorship.

Libraries: An American Value (1999)  Adopted by ALA Council, this brief statement pronounces the distinguished place libraries hold in our society and their core tenets of access to materials and diversity of ideas.

Guidelines for Library Policies (2019) Guidelines for librarians, governing authorities, and other library staff and library users on how constitutional principles apply to libraries in the United States.

Intellectual Freedom and Censorship Q&A (2007)

Social Media Guidelines for Public and Academic Libraries (2018)

These guidelines provide a policy and implementation framework for public and academic libraries engaging in the use of social media.

Publications

Intellectual Freedom Manual (2021) Edited by Martin Garnar and Trina Magi with ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom The 10th edition manual is an indispensable resource for day-to-day guidance on maintaining free and equal access to information for all people

Journal of Intellectual Freedom and Privacy (2016 - present) Edited by Shannon Oltmann with ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom Published quarterly, JIFP offers articles related to intellectual freedom and privacy, both in libraries and in the wider world.

True Stories of Censorship Battles in America's Libraries (2012) By Valerie Nye and Kathy Barco This book is a collection of accounts from librarians who have dealt with censorship in some form. Divided into seven parts, the book covers intralibrary censorship, child-oriented protectionism, the importance of building strong policies, experiences working with sensitive materials, public debates and controversies, criminal patrons, and library displays.

Beyond Banned Books: Defending Intellectual Freedom throughout Your Library (2019) By Kristin Pekoll with ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom A level-headed guide that uses specific case studies to offer practical guidance on safeguarding intellectual freedom related to library displays, programming, and other librarian-created content. 

Lessons in Censorship: How Schools and Courts Subvert Students' First Amendment Rights (2015) By Catherine J. Ross Lessons in Censorship highlights the troubling and growing tendency of schools to clamp down on off-campus speech such as texting and sexting and reveals how well-intentioned measures to counter verbal bullying and hate speech may impinge on free speech. Throughout, Ross proposes ways to protect free expression without disrupting education.

Assistance and Consultation

The staff of the Office for Intellectual Freedom is available to answer questions or provide assistance to librarians, trustees, educators, and the public about the First Amendment and censorship. Areas of assistance include policy development, minors’ rights, and professional ethics. Inquiries can be directed via email to [email protected] or via phone at (312) 280-4226.

Updated October 2021

First Amendment - List of Essay Samples And Topic Ideas

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the freedom of speech, religion, and the press, among other rights. An essay could delve into the historical context of the First Amendment, significant court cases that have interpreted the First Amendment, and ongoing debates about the limits of these freedoms. We have collected a large number of free essay examples about First Amendment you can find in Papersowl database. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

First Amendment Values

Americans value the First Amendment as much as a teenage girl values her cell phone. Life just wouldn't be the same without it. Thanks to the authors of the Constitution America has established the fundamental laws, government, and basic rights for American citizens. The document was signed on September 17, 1787, in Philadelphia. Later, Madison introduced 19 amendments, 12 of which were adopted. Ten of them were ratified and became the Bill of Rights on December 10, 1791. The First […]

Civil Rights and First Amendment

How does the text define civil rights? Civil rights are the freedom from unequal treatment. To have civil rights is to have the freedom to be able to participate in all aspects of a society, “to vote, use public facilities, and exercise equal economic opportunity.” It takes the government to protect the civil rights of the people but protecting the rights of some can infringe the rights of others by forcing prejudice people to accept a society that they are […]

The Bill of Rights and Constitution

On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights became part of the Constitution. These amendments were created to protect the rights of the citizens of the United States. The most important rights that were created in the Bill of Rights is the first amendment, it protects a citizen's freedom of speech and allow them to freely speak what they want and believe. It also allows the freedom of religion and press. First Amendment allows Americans who live in a country […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

The First Amendment

The First Amendment does not protect all forms of speech. Although its protections are incredibly diverse and broad, the First Amendment does not protect forms of speech including: “obscenity, fighting words, defamation (including libel and slander), child pornography, perjury, blackmail, incitement to imminent lawless action, true threats, and solicitations to commit crimes” (Freedom Forum Institute, 1). The incorporation doctrine is a constitutional doctrine establishing the Bill of Rights (amendments 1-10) as fundamental rights guaranteed in both federal and state court […]

The Origins of the First Amendment

The first well-known amendment of the constitution, the first amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.". The U.S. government cannot require a specific religion for all its citizens. United States citizens have the right to decide what faith we want to […]

3d Printed Guns It is Constitutional

Even though this is an incredibly new technology, politicians and even presidents around the globe makers have recognized 3D printed guns and what’s behind it. Regardless of what their actual thoughts are on the topic, the laws that they have tried to put into place that obstructs the progress of the technology has risen the number of questions that deal with it. Questions such as whether or not it is constitutional to make them, distribute them or even use them. […]

Protection our First Amendment V. the End Collective Bargaining

On June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled, with a vote of 5 to 4, in favor of Marc Janus in the case Janus v. American Federation of County, and Municipal Employees. The Supreme Court overturns the 40-year-old precedence that mandated for unions in 22 states for non-members to pay agency fees that help fund collective bargaining activities. For the simple reason that regardless of membership status non-members still benefited from any bargaining outcomes. Marc Janus is a state employee, […]

Banned Books and the First Amendment Essay

Literature is an important aspect of the human life. The freedom of reading is an issue due to language usage and subject matter. Banning books could either be censoring individuals from the pain of history, or allowing them to expand their intellectual capacity. Evidently, banning books could be both favorable, and a cause for concern. The article “Read the Great Books That Use the Worst Slur,” authored by Tonyn Norman argues the need to protect the eyes and ears of […]

The First and Fourteenth Amendment

Without freedom of speech and equal protection, our country would be drastically different. There are two essential things to remember about the First Amendment protection of free speech. The main reason we have freedom of speech is to allow for public criticism of the government. Secondly, it important to remember is that the First Amendment protects us from the government doing things that try to refuse your freedom of speech, but not anyone else. What this means is that we […]

First Amendment Petition Clause

Under the United States Constitution, the first amendment protects the American right to petition the government for redress of grievances. In the Declaration of Independence, Congress included American's list of grievances toward the British government. American colonies repeatedly requested relief from these said grievances such as taxation without consent, or the prevention of people elected rulers, but they were only met with more restrictions. One of the main reasons this right is so important was because the United States' first […]

First Amendment Freedom of Speech

The 2017 Berkeley protests organized by different groups including By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) were an abject violation of the freedom of speech as outlined in the First Amendment of the American constitution. The protests successfully stopped a speech by Milo Yiannopoulos, a controversial Breitbart editor and a self-declared Trump supporter. The protests turned violent and led to the destruction of the property thus posing significant harm to the society. In defending the protests, Yvette Felarca, BAMN’s spokesperson argued that […]

1st Amendment and Congress

David Thuita I Amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The beginning of the second amendment finds its root in Athens, Greece during the 400s B.C., where free men were allowed to freely speak. Athen theaters, writings, and educational institutions all […]

The Original Bill of Rights

On September 25, 1789, state legislatures were presented with twelve amendments drafted by James Madison for addition to the Constitution. Ten of those twelve amendments, numbers 3 through 12, were ratified and employed by the federal government on December 15, 1791, thus becoming the United States Bill of Rights (Jordan). The Bill of Rights acted as a compromise between the federalists and anti-federalists to ensure the Constitution's ratification (Bill of Rights Institute Staff, "Bill of Rights"). Anti-federalists argued that the […]

Should Social Media be Regulated: Safeguarding Freedom of Speech and the Press

If you are reading this paper, I’m positive you have previously encountered social media platforms. These platforms show up everywhere, and they have so deeply infiltrated our everyday lives that it is almost impossible to avoid them. This paper isn’t intended to discuss the positives and negatives of social media. It’s not even intended to tell you if you should use social media or not. This paper is intended to present the debate of who should be regulating social media […]

The First Amendment in Action: Everson V. Board of Education

Imagine stepping back into 1947, a time when America was navigating the complexities of post-war society and grappling with questions about its foundational values, particularly the separation of church and state. Enter the scene: Everson v. Board of Education, a Supreme Court case that, at first glance, centered around something as mundane as whether New Jersey could reimburse parents for bus fares to send their children to Catholic schools. But, oh, was there more to the story! This case wasn't […]

Additional Example Essays

• Main Reasons of Seperation from Great Britain
• Why The Declaration of Independence Is Compelling?
• Differences Between Articles of Confederation and Constitution
• Compare And Contrast In WW1 And WW2
• Logical Fallacies in Letter From Birmingham Jail
• How the Roles of Women and Men Were Portrayed in "A Doll's House"
• Analysis of Letter from Birmingham Jail
• The Importance of Professional Bearing in the Military
• Socioautobiography Choices and Experiences Growing up
• Biggest Influence In Your Life
• The History of the United States of America

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Research & Learn

Table of contents, first amendment overview essays.

The essays included in this collection give overviews of some of the most important areas of First Amendment law and scholarship. FIRE hopes that these essays explain the basics of First Amendment case law and jargon in a succinct, yet informative manner. This collection will expand on a regular basis, so please check back for more content.

Chilling Effect

The "chilling effect" refers to a phenomenon where individuals or groups refrain from engaging in expression for fear of running afoul of a law or regulation. Chilling effects generally occur when a law is either too broad or too vague. Individuals steer far clear from the reaches of the law for fear of retaliation, prosecution, or punitive governmental action. Read more about the chilling effect .

COVID-19 Emergency Measures and the First Amendment

The pandemic caused by the pervasive spread of the virus known as COVID-19 has placed significant pressure on government officials to act quickly to try to save lives and slow the spread of the virus. Many officials have responded with significant restrictions in the form of emergency stay-at-home orders, executive orders closing all but “essential” businesses, and bans on public gatherings — often of groups of more than 10 people. . . No matter one’s political beliefs, this time has also placed significant strains on First Amendment freedoms. Read more about COVID-19 emergency measures and the First Amendment .

Defamation refers to false statements of fact that harm another’s reputation. It encompasses both libel and slander. Libel generally refers to written defamation, while slander refers to oral defamation. Read more about defamation .

Fighting Words

The First Amendment may protect profanity directed against another. Then again, such intemperate speech may fall into a narrow, traditionally unprotected category of expression known as “fighting words.” Read more about fighting words .

Freedom of the Press

Collectively, this bundle of rights, largely developed by U.S. Supreme Court decisions, defines the “freedom of the press” guaranteed by the First Amendment. What we mean by the freedom of the press is, in fact, an evolving concept. It is a concept that is informed by the perceptions of those who crafted the press clause in an era of pamphlets, political tracts and periodical newspapers, and by the views of Supreme Court justices who have interpreted that clause over the past two centuries in a world of daily newspapers, books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and television broadcasts, and internet content. Read more about freedom of the press .

K–12 Expression and the First Amendment

Public school students “do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). Such rights must, however, be considered in the context of “the special characteristics of the school environment.” This means that while public school students possess free speech rights at school, school officials can regulate speech more as educators than governments can as sovereign. Read more about K–12 expression and the First Amendment .

Nude Dancing

The First Amendment protects much more than the spoken or printed word. It also protects various forms of symbolic speech and expressive conduct. The Supreme Court has ruled that the display of a red flag, the wearing of a black armband, the burning of the American flag and yes, even nude performance dancing are forms of expression that when restricted, require First Amendment review. Read more about nude dancing and the First Amendment.

Overbreadth

Overbreadth is a supremely important concept in First Amendment law and a key tool for constitutional litigators. A law is too broad—or overbroad—when it not only covers speech that ought to be proscribed but also penalizes speech that should be safeguarded. Read more about overbreadth . 

Secondary Effects Doctrine

The secondary effects doctrine allows government officials to treat patently content-based laws as content-neutral. The animating logic is that government officials are not suppressing speech because of its content but because of adverse side effects associated with the speech, such as increased crime or decreased property values. Read more about the secondary effects doctrine . 

• Share this selection on Twitter
• Share this selection via email

Princeton Legal Journal

The First Amendment and the Abortion Rights Debate

Sofia Cipriano

Following Dobbs v. Jackson ’s (2022) reversal of Roe v. Wade (1973) — and the subsequent revocation of federal abortion protection — activists and scholars have begun to reconsider how to best ground abortion rights in the Constitution. In the past year, numerous Jewish rights groups have attempted to overturn state abortion bans by arguing that abortion rights are protected by various state constitutions’ free exercise clauses — and, by extension, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. While reframing the abortion rights debate as a question of religious freedom is undoubtedly strategic, the Free Exercise Clause is not the only place to locate abortion rights: the Establishment Clause also warrants further investigation. 

Roe anchored abortion rights in the right to privacy — an unenumerated right with a long history of legal recognition. In various cases spanning the past two centuries, t he Supreme Court located the right to privacy in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments . Roe classified abortion as a fundamental right protected by strict scrutiny, meaning that states could only regulate abortion in the face of a “compelling government interest” and must narrowly tailor legislation to that end. As such, Roe ’s trimester framework prevented states from placing burdens on abortion access in the first few months of pregnancy. After the fetus crosses the viability line — the point at which the fetus can survive outside the womb  — states could pass laws regulating abortion, as the Court found that   “the potentiality of human life”  constitutes a “compelling” interest. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) later replaced strict scrutiny with the weaker “undue burden” standard, giving states greater leeway to restrict abortion access. Dobbs v. Jackson overturned both Roe and Casey , leaving abortion regulations up to individual states. 

While Roe constituted an essential step forward in terms of abortion rights, weaknesses in its argumentation made it more susceptible to attacks by skeptics of substantive due process. Roe argues that the unenumerated right to abortion is implied by the unenumerated right to privacy — a chain of logic which twice removes abortion rights from the Constitution’s language. Moreover, Roe’s trimester framework was unclear and flawed from the beginning, lacking substantial scientific rationale. As medicine becomes more and more advanced, the arbitrariness of the viability line has grown increasingly apparent.  

As abortion rights supporters have looked for alternative constitutional justifications for abortion rights, the First Amendment has become increasingly more visible. Certain religious groups — particularly Jewish groups — have argued that they have a right to abortion care. In Generation to Generation Inc v. Florida , a religious rights group argued that Florida’s abortion ban (HB 5) constituted a violation of the Florida State Constitution: “In Jewish law, abortion is required if necessary to protect the health, mental or physical well-being of the woman, or for many other reasons not permitted under the Act. As such, the Act prohibits Jewish women from practicing their faith free of government intrusion and thus violates their privacy rights and religious freedom.” Similar cases have arisen in Indiana and Texas. Absent constitutional protection of abortion rights, the Christian religious majorities in many states may unjustly impose their moral and ethical code on other groups, implying an unconstitutional religious hierarchy. 

Cases like Generation to Generation Inc v. Florida may also trigger heightened scrutiny status in higher courts; The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (1993) places strict scrutiny on cases which “burden any aspect of religious observance or practice.”

But framing the issue as one of Free Exercise does not interact with major objections to abortion rights. Anti-abortion advocates contend that abortion is tantamount to murder. An anti-abortion advocate may argue that just as religious rituals involving human sacrifice are illegal, so abortion ought to be illegal. Anti-abortion advocates may be able to argue that abortion bans hold up against strict scrutiny since “preserving potential life” constitutes a “compelling interest.”

The question of when life begins—which is fundamentally a moral and religious question—is both essential to the abortion debate and often ignored by left-leaning activists. For select Christian advocacy groups (as well as other anti-abortion groups) who believe that life begins at conception, abortion bans are a deeply moral issue. Abortion bans which operate under the logic that abortion is murder essentially legislate a definition of when life begins, which is problematic from a First Amendment perspective; the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prevents the government from intervening in religious debates. While numerous legal thinkers have associated the abortion debate with the First Amendment, this argument has not been fully litigated. As an amicus brief filed in Dobbs by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Center for Inquiry, and American Atheists  points out, anti-abortion rhetoric is explicitly religious: “There is hardly a secular veil to the religious intent and positions of individuals, churches, and state actors in their attempts to limit access to abortion.” Justice Stevens located a similar issue with anti-abortion rhetoric in his concurring opinion in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) , stating: “I am persuaded that the absence of any secular purpose for the legislative declarations that life begins at conception and that conception occurs at fertilization makes the relevant portion of the preamble invalid under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution.” Judges who justify their judicial decisions on abortion using similar rhetoric blur the line between church and state. 

Framing the abortion debate around religious freedom would thus address the two main categories of arguments made by anti-abortion activists: arguments centered around issues with substantive due process and moral objections to abortion. 

Conservatives may maintain, however, that legalizing abortion on the federal level is an Establishment Clause violation to begin with, since the government would essentially be imposing a federal position on abortion. Many anti-abortion advocates favor leaving abortion rights up to individual states. However, in the absence of recognized federal, constitutional protection of abortion rights, states will ban abortion. Protecting religious freedom of the individual is of the utmost importance  — the United States government must actively intervene in order to uphold the line between church and state. Protecting abortion rights would allow everyone in the United States to act in accordance with their own moral and religious perspectives on abortion. 

Reframing the abortion rights debate as a question of religious freedom is the most viable path forward. Anchoring abortion rights in the Establishment Clause would ensure Americans have the right to maintain their own personal and religious beliefs regarding the question of when life begins. In the short term, however, litigants could take advantage of Establishment Clauses in state constitutions. Yet, given the swing of the Court towards expanding religious freedom protections at the time of writing, Free Exercise arguments may prove better at securing citizens a right to an abortion. 

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

• Essay Database
• world trade center
• Greek Food and Culture
• The Future Portrayed I…
• Intercultural Communications
• In Heart of Darkness, …
• Things Fall Apart by C…
• In J.M. Coetzee's Wait…
• The Criminals Of Profe…
• Socialization of Children
• The Poet of Nature, Wi…
• Leonhard Euler
• Articles of Confederat…
• About all Sharks
• Vietnam Poetry

"A First Amendment Junkie" by Susan Jacoby.

What is paper-research.

• Custom Writing Service
• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy
• Biographies

Legal experts say the TikTok divest-or-ban bill could stand up in court despite being a free-speech disaster

• President Joe Biden signed the TikTok divest-or-ban bill into law on Wednesday.
• TikTok said it would challenge the law in court, citing First-Amendment violations.
• Legal experts said Congress' national-security argument could still win  over free-speech concerns in courts.

Congress passed a bill this week that will force TikTok's owner to sell its US assets or face removal from mobile-app stores. President Joe Biden signed the bill into law on Wednesday. Parent company ByteDance now has between 9 months and a year to sell or spin off the app in the US.

What comes next will be an all-out legal battle.

TikTok has vowed to "move to the courts," where it plans to challenge the law as "a clear violation of the First Amendment rights of the 170 million Americans on TikTok," per an internal memo sent to staff on Saturday. The company will likely ask for a preliminary injunction, stopping the countdown clock on its sale until legal questions are sorted out.

Other parties, like TikTok creators , may launch separate legal challenges in the coming weeks, as they have done in the past. First-Amendment-focused organizations like the ACLU or the EFF could file amicus briefs defending TikTokers' free-speech rights.

Will these legal challenges work? Maybe…

Earlier attempts to ban or force a sale of TikTok often haven't stood up in court.

Trump's 2020 order to ban TikTok was halted by a federal judge who said it likely exceeded executive authority. A Montana law that attempted to ban the app was struck down in 2023 by a federal judge who said it overstepped state power and "likely violates the First Amendment."

This time, however, could be different. The reason? Congress is arguing that TikTok poses a national-security risk, and the courts tend to defer to that governing body when it comes to issues of national security, experts told Business Insider. The federal government has more authority on that subject than a state like Montana does.

"The court will look at the merits of the case, but really driven by deference to Congress as having much more understanding of the national-security risks than the judges themselves do," Matthew Schettenhelm, a senior litigation analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, told BI. Schettenhelm estimated the law had a 70% chance of surviving a legal challenge.

It's a coin toss when national-security interests come up against speech protections

If this law wasn't about protecting national security, TikTok's case would be a slam dunk. Its argument that the law violates free speech is clear, as passing a bill that could lead to a ban will box out tens of millions of Americans from an app they use to say things every day.

While the bill is framed around forcing new ownership of TikTok, it's likely to result in a ban, which strengthens the free-speech argument. The Chinese government has signaled it opposes a TikTok divestment. Its foreign ministry said last month that a forced sale was "sheer robbers' logic." Its government has the final say on the export of TikTok's algorithm, which would make the app much harder to spin-off.

Restricting free speech would be a big problem for the bill if it didn't have national-security interests at its core. While First-Amendment arguments are well supported in court, national-security concerns also have a lot of sway, legal experts told BI.

"The First Amendment is the trump card that basically allows you to prevail if you can plausibly make a First-Amendment argument," said G.S. Hans, an associate clinical professor of law at Cornell Law School and associate director of its First-Amendment clinic. "National security also is a trump card, and the government often wins when it claims that. The question for me is, which trump card does the court think is more valuable?"

Security arguments have stood up in the past for more narrow cases against TikTok. A federal judge upheld a Texas law that blocked state employees from using the app on state-owned devices and networks, saying it was a "reasonable restriction on access to TikTok in light of Texas's concerns."

Show us your smoking-gun evidence, Congress

Legal experts said the evidence the US government brings to court to prove that TikTok is a national-security risk will be central to its case. It has to demonstrate that a forced divestiture or outright ban is necessary.

"It can't be just conclusory, or in other words to say, 'We think there's a national security threat. Therefore we should ban the app,'" said Lena Shapiro, director of the First Amendment clinic at the University of Illinois College of Law. "They have to provide evidence."

Congress' bipartisan bill is the culmination of years of political attacks from Washington on TikTok's operations . Politicians fear its owner ByteDance, which is headquartered in China, could be forced to share US user data with the Chinese Communist Party because of a standing National Intelligence Law. US officials have also raised concerns that the CCP could use TikTok to censor or promote information and even influence an election, serving its own interests. TikTok has denied both of these claims.

"We believe the facts and the law are clearly on our side, and we will ultimately prevail," a TikTok spokesperson told BI in a statement. "We have invested billions of dollars to keep US data safe and our platform free from outside influence and manipulation."

Congress hasn't proven that an outright sale or ban of TikTok is the only way to protect national-security interests. Other less severe efforts like a national data privacy law could solve some of its concerns without limiting speech, for example.

"The government bears the burden of pointing to an important interest in instituting this law," said Ramya Krishnan, a senior staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which filed a legal challenge against Texas's state-device ban last year. "There's the onus of showing that it could not achieve its interest in narrower ways."

If you enjoyed this story, be sure to follow Business Insider on Microsoft Start.

Morning Rundown: Trump lawyer backs away from absolute immunity argument, China warns against 'downward spiral' in U.S. relations, and key takeaways from the NFL draft

Opening statements in Trump's historic trial set to begin Monday after tense day of jury selection

Opening statements are set to begin next week in Donald Trump’s historic criminal trial after the final members of the jury were seated Friday, following a dramatic day in which two prospective jurors broke down in tears, an appeals court judge rejected Trump's request for a stay, and a man set himself on fire in front of the courthouse.

“We’re going to have opening statements on Monday morning. This trial is starting,” Judge Juan Merchan said towards the end of the day, after successfully seating the remaining five alternate jurors that were needed.

The case — the first-ever criminal trial of a former president —will be heard by a panel of 12 jurors and a total of six alternates. It's expected to last roughly six weeks.

The five alternates ultimately selected Friday include an unemployed married woman who’s into art and described herself as not political, an audio professional, a contract specialist, a clothing company executive and a construction company project manager. It took four days of jury selection to find the 18 jurors.

Around the same time the judge declared, "we have our full panel" inside the courtroom in the early afternoon, a man set himself on fire outside the courthouse. The NYPD said the man, identified as Max Azzarello of Florida, later died. He appeared to have had pamphlets describing a conspiracy involving cryptocurrency that he threw around before setting himself ablaze, police said.

Later in the afternoon, Trump's attorneys were in a state appeals court trying again to get an emergency stay of the trial. Trump attorney Cliff Robert argued his client could not get a fair trial in Manhattan, which had been Trump's longtime home before moving to Florida after he was elected president in 2016.

Steven Wu of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office countered that "what the last week has shown is that the jury selection has worked."

"We have 18 ordinary New Yorkers who are ready to serve. It would be unfair to them and the public for this to be delayed further," he argued. The judge rejected Trump's stay request a short time later.  

The jury selection process Friday was especially intense, some potential jurors breaking down in tears and others saying they were too anxious to serve.

The day began with the judge calling up the 22 remaining potential jurors from the previous pool of 96 to answer questions designed to indicate whether they could be fair and impartial about the divisive real estate mogul and presumptive Republican nominee for president.

The first of those potential jurors was dismissed after she said she didn’t think she could be fair. “I have really, really bad anxiety and people have found out where I am,” she told the judge. A short time later, two other potential jurors were dismissed after each told the judge that upon further reflection, “I don’t think I can be impartial.”

Other potential jurors included a married father who said he listens to a podcast called “Order of Man,” which is described on Apple’s website as discussions about “reclaiming what it means to be a man.” Some past guests of the podcast include people who’ve been outspoken in their support of Trump and were highly critical of the civil fraud case New York Attorney General Letitia James brought against the former president. The man, an audio specialist, was chosen as one of the alternates.

Another potential juror was a married fund manager who said he’d done “get-out-the-vote” work for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Trump’s 2016 presidential opponent. Trump and his attorney Todd Blanche passed notes back and forth while that juror was speaking. He was later dismissed after being asked about a 2020 Facebook post where he apparently called Trump “the devil and a sociopath.”

Trump appeared most interested in jurors whose answers offer ambiguity around their personal political views. When one prospective juror said they were a Fox News viewer, Trump cocked his head, then quickly conferred with his lawyer, Todd Blanche.

Another potential juror was a woman who became emotional as she disclosed she'd served two years in prison on drug-related charges, but said she could be "fair and impartial."

During a morning break, Merchan — who'd chided reporters on Thursday for disclosing too much information about potential jurors — said the woman had shared "very personal things about her life" and was "very brave." “I just wanted to encourage the press to please be kind. Please be kind to this person,” the judge said. He later dismissed her, saying she needed a certificate of release to be qualified for service going forward. On her way out, she cheerfully called out, "Good luck!"

Following that juror's departure, the DA's office began its individual questioning of the jurors. One woman, who'd disclosed that her father is lifelong friends with Trump ally turned critic Chris Christie, broke down in tears when prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked her an innocuous question about the burden of proof in the case. "I feel so nervous and anxious right now. I’m sorry," she responded, bursting out into tears. "I thought I could do this," she said, adding "I wouldn’t want someone who feels this way to judge my case." She was dismissed.

Hoffinger's questioning was followed by Trump attorney Susan Necheles, who asked a potential juror who'd started their own business how she would assess a witness's credibility. The woman then asked to speak to the judge, saying she was "getting anxiety and self-doubt” from Necheles's line of questioning. She was dismissed. 

Necheles later asked another woman — who previously said she was a victim of sexual assault — whether she would hold it against Trump that women outside this case have accused Trump of sexual assault. She said she would not have a problem setting those accusations aside but the judge ultimately excused her, saying, "It’s best to err on the side of caution."

Another man said he has some differences from Trump on his policies but thinks he's “usually awesome.” He was not chosen for the jury.

On his way into court in the morning, Trump again complained the case against him is "unfair," and that the partial gag order preventing him from lashing out at witnesses, prosecutors, court staffers and jurors is not "constitutional." "Everyone else can say whatever they want about me. They can say anything they want. They can continue to make up lies and everything else. They lie. They’re real scum. But you know what? I’m not allowed to speak," he told reporters.

Prosecutors this week asked the judge to fine Trump and hold him in contempt for social media posts that they said violate the gag order. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Tuesday.

The m a in pa nel of 12 is made up of seven men and five women, including two lawyers, a teacher, a retired wealth manager, a product development manager, a security engineer, a software engineer, a speech therapist and a physical therapist. The foreman — the juror who essentially acts as the leader and spokesperson for the panel — is a married man who works in sales and gets his news from The New York Times, MSNBC and Fox News.

The lone alternate selected Thursday is a woman who works as an asset manager.

Trump vented about the speed of the process in a post on social media shortly after the final jurors were selected, claiming the judge is “‘railroading’ me, at breakneck speed, in order to completely satisfy his ‘friends’.”

Later in the day, Merchan held what's known as a Sandoval hearing . That's a type of hearing designed to let defendants know the scope of questions they could face from prosecutors on cross-examination so they can make informed decisions about whether to take the witness stand in their own defense.

Leaving court on Friday, Trump was asked whether he was still planning to testify and he said he was.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office disclosed in a court filing that it would like to ask Trump about several items, among them the $464 million civil judgment against him and his company for fraud , the total $88 million verdicts and liability findings for sexual abuse  and  defamation in lawsuits brought by writer E. Jean Carroll and a number of other adverse court rulings over the past few years.

Trump has denied wrongdoing in all the cases and is appealing  the fraud judgment and the Carroll verdicts.

Prosecutors said they want to be able to bring those findings up “to impeach the credibility of the defendant” if he takes the witness stand.

Discussing the findings in the fraud case, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told the judge it was "hard to think of something that is more squarely in the wheelhouse” for the DA to ask Trump about "than a finding by a judge of persistent and repeated fraud and illegality."

Trump's attorney Emil Bove countered that prosecutors shouldn't be able to breach the topic at all because Trump's appeal is still pending. He made similar arguments over the DA's contention that they should be allowed to ask about a judge's finding that he was untruthful on the witness stand during the fraud trial and had violated a gag order in the case.

“Is it your position that because a case is being appealed or might be appealed, that therefore it can not be used?" Merchan asked the lawyer. "Not necessarily," Bove replied.

The judge said he'd issue his ruling on the dispute on Monday morning.

Trump said last week he  “absolutely” plans to testify , but he is under no obligation to do so.

Asked by Necheles at the end of the day who the DA's first witness would be, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said they wouldn't inform Trump's team of the person's identity until Sunday, given that Trump has been criticizing some witnesses on social media despite the partial gag order in the case. “And if that should be tweeted, that’ll be the last time we provide that courtesy,” Steinglass said.

Merchan called the DA's position "understandable" and told Necheles "I will not compel them to do anything."

Trump has pleaded  not guilty  to 34 counts of falsifying business records and faces up to four years in prison if he is convicted.

Bragg alleges that Trump falsified records to hide money he was paying his former lawyer Michael Cohen to reimburse him for $130,000 he paid adult film actor Stormy Daniels  near the end of the 2016 presidential campaign. Daniels has claimed she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. Trump has denied that he slept with Daniels, but he has acknowledged repaying Cohen.

The DA’s office also alleges that as part of a scheme to boost Trump, National Enquirer publisher American Media Inc. paid $150,000 to model and actor Karen McDougal , who appeared in Playboy magazine and claimed that she had a nine-month affair with Trump before he was elected president “in exchange for her agreement not to speak out about the alleged sexual relationship,” according to a statement of facts filed by Bragg.

Trump has also denied having a sexual relationship with McDougal.

Adam Reiss is a reporter and producer for NBC and MSNBC.

Lisa Rubin is an MSNBC legal correspondent and a former litigator.

Dareh Gregorian is a politics reporter for NBC News.