1 / 22

Absolutist vs. Relativist: Exploring First Amendment Perspectives of Nat Hentoff and Robert Bork

Delve into the contrasting views of First Amendment rights held by Nat Hentoff and Robert Bork. Hentoff, an absolutist, believes that any restriction on speech, including libel laws, infringes upon the First Amendment. In contrast, Bork, a relativist, argues that the First Amendment was intended to safeguard political speech and not to protect vulgarity or obscenity. This discourse reveals the complexities of free speech, censorship, and the varying interpretations of the Founding Fathers' intent, highlighting the ongoing debate over political ideas versus the threat of censorship.

marty
Télécharger la présentation

Absolutist vs. Relativist: Exploring First Amendment Perspectives of Nat Hentoff and Robert Bork

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. First Amendment Are you an absolutistor a relativist?

  2. Nat Hentoff: Absolutist • Northeastern graduate

  3. Nat Hentoff: Absolutist • Northeastern graduate • Wrote liner notes for John Coltrane andBob Dylan albums

  4. Nat Hentoff: Absolutist • Northeastern graduate • Wrote liner notes for John Coltrane andBob Dylan albums • First Amendment views formed by getting kicked off the Northeastern News

  5. Robert Bork: Relativist • Served Richard Nixon

  6. Robert Bork: Relativist • Served Richard Nixon • Failed Supreme Court nominee

  7. Robert Bork: Relativist • Served Richard Nixon • Failed Supreme Court nominee • Blames liberal judges for protecting “vulgarity and obscenity”

  8. Understanding“make no law” • Hentoff: Any restriction on speech, even libel law, violates the First Amendment

  9. Understanding“make no law” • Hentoff: Any restriction on speech, even libel law, violates the First Amendment • Bork: The First Amendment was meant to protect political speech, not indecency and violence

  10. Understanding“make no law” • Hentoff: Any restriction on speech, even libel law, violates the First Amendment • Bork: The First Amendment was meant to protect political speech, not indecency and violence

  11. Hentoff on obscenity • Founders were unconcerned

  12. Hentoff on obscenity • Founders were unconcerned • Supreme Court didn’t mention until 1957

  13. Hentoff on obscenity • Founders were unconcerned • Supreme Court didn’t mention until 1957 • Brennan (right), in Roth, introduced social value

  14. Lenny Bruce • A satirist with a dirty mouth

  15. Lenny Bruce • A satirist with a dirty mouth • How do you define social value?

  16. Lenny Bruce • A satirist with a dirty mouth • How do you define social value? • Won on appeal,but it was too late

  17. Bork on obscenity • Criticizes Snoop Dogg, Nine Inch Nails

  18. Bork on obscenity • Criticizes Snoop Dogg, Nine Inch Nails • Driven by aesthetic as well as legal judgments

  19. Bork on obscenity • Criticizes Snoop Dogg, Nine Inch Nails • Driven by aesthetic as well as legal judgments • Hentoff may be wrong — Chaplinsky,Near v. Minnesota

  20. Hentoff versus Bork • Protection of political ideas versus threat of censorship

  21. Hentoff versus Bork • Protection of political ideas versus threat of censorship • A loophole for censors versus a loophole for pornographers

  22. Hentoff versus Bork • Protection of political ideas versus threat of censorship • A loophole for censors versus a loophole for pornographers • Minority rights versus majority rule

More Related