First Amendment & Censorship

5 Pages631 Words434 Views

Added on 2023-04-06

About This Document

This memo discusses the potential violation of First Amendment rights related to the freedom of speech in the case of Cardigans' controversial clothing line. It explores the use of the Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation case as a defense and highlights the lack of a defined standard for indecency in censorship provisions. The memo argues that the denial of commercial broadcast by WBLAH may have breached Cardigans' First Amendment rights.

First Amendment & Censorship

Added on 2023-04-06

Related Documents

MEMO
FIRST AMENDMENT & CENSORSHIP
STUDENT ID:
[Pick the date]

MEMO
Date: March 12th, 2019
To: Rice E. Roni, Supervising Attorney, CARDWARE Inc.
From: Paralegal (Corporate Counsel CARDWARE)
Re: The Cardigans Defense
Dear Sir
This memo aims to introduce this interesting case where a rather controversial name of the
clothing line by Cardigans has led to potential violation of First amendment rights related to
the freedom of speech. The slogan of their clothing line is “So light You Won’t Know You
are Wearing a Thing!” which furthers the issue. Owing to the name of the brand and the
controversial slogan, the local television station WBLAH has denied airing the related
commercial of the product.
The first amendment states the following
“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”
(Friendly, 2013, p.68)
In wake of the above clause and enforcement of the same in both letter and spirit, it seems
that the underlying rights guaranteed to Cardigans’ have been unreasonably abridged.
2

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.