Arleen Santana

Nurre v Whitehead Claim Whitehead censored her speechi.e., her performance of instrumental musicin violation of the First Amendments protection of free speech. Second, she claims that Whitehead acted with hostility toward religion in violation of the First Amendments Establishment Clause. Finally, she argues that in treating her and her classmates differently than past JHS graduating classes, Whitehead violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Majority Opinion the District had not violated any of Nurres constitutionally protected rights, and therefore no municipal liability could attach to the District through Whitehead in her official capacity 1) a limited public forum was created. + graduation ceremony was a school-sponsored function that all graduating seniors could be expected to attend 2) all musical performances at graduation entirely secular in nature was reasonable in light of the circumstances surrounding a high school graduation, and therefore it did not violate Nurres right to free speech 3) Did not violate the Lemon Test which tests the violation of the 14th Amendment which is (1) have a secular purpose, (2) not have as its principal or primary effect the advancement or inhibition of religion, (3) not foster an excessive governmental entanglement with religion Dissent 1) The School has misjudged the Establishment Clauses requirements and, in so doing, violated Nurres First Amendment rights 2) practical effect will be for public school administrators to chillor even killmusical and artistic presentations by their students 3) Increasingly hypersensitive way in which students may express themselves and hasten the retrogression into a nation of Philistines, with little or no understanding of civic and cultural heritage. Miller v. California Claims 1. Miller was mailing unsolicited sexually explicit material in violation of a California statute against obscenity. Majority

Arleen Santana

1. Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment. 2. Creates the Miller test in which the material has to a) when applied as a whole an average person would find it applying to the prurient interest of the contemporary community, b) offensive, c) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. Dissent Douglas Dissent + the test is very vague Brennan dissent: the statute is overbroad making it invalid. It doesnt give fair notice, and make it easy to censor