William_T._Bianco,_David_T._Canon]_American_Polit

Freedom of speech, assembly, and the press 117

freedoms; the act also specified exceptions to the Controlled Substances Act to allow the

use of peyote in religious ceremonies. After several cases and congressional actions, the

Court made it clear that it would have the final word in deciding when a compelling interest

is required in order to limit religious practice.^38 The Court relied on this standard in the

controversial 2014 case involving the family-owned Hobby Lobby stores, ruling that a

“closely held” private corporation could not be forced to provide contraception to women

under the Affordable Care Act if there was a “less restrictive” means available to have the

insurance provide it.^39 This was the first time that a corporation was given First Amendment

protections based on the religious beliefs of the owners of the corporation.

The Court also expanded religious freedom when it approved, for the first time in 2017,

direct government payments to a church in support of a secular purpose (in this case, funds

for a playground in a church-run day care center). The Court ruled that churches should

have equal access to state grants made available to fund neutral, secular programs.^40

In a highly anticipated case, the Court was faced with a difficult question concerning

the civil rights of a same-sex couple and the religious beliefs of a cake shop owner. The

baker had refused to bake a cake for the couple, saying that it would violate his religious

beliefs. The Court avoided ruling on this central question because the Colorado Civil

Rights Commission, which initially heard the case, did not treat religion in a neutral

manner and did not give the baker a fair hearing. While concluding that the baker did not

have to bake the cake because of the Commission’s biased behavior, the Court affirmed

that LGBTQ people have “equal access to goods and services under a neutral and

generally applicable public accommodations law.”^41

“Why

Should

I Care?”

Being familiar with these freedoms and the controversies around them is important

because they concern the most deeply personal freedoms debated today. Would

you, or do you, send your children to religious schools? Should the government pay

for it? If you attend a public college or university, should it be allowed to organize

a prayer before a football or basketball game? Should business owners be able to

deny equal access to a service (baking a wedding cake) or a public program (health

insurance) because of their religious beliefs?

Freedom of Speech, Assembly, and the Press

As we noted earlier, defining the scope of our civil liberties depends on balancing

interests and drawing lines. This is especially true of the First Amendment’s freedom

of speech, which can be envisioned on a continuum from most to least protected types

of speech based on the Supreme Court cases that have tested their limits.

Generally Protected Expression

Any time you attend a religious service or a political rally, post a Tweet, write a blog

post or letter to the editor, or express a political idea, you are protected by the First

Amendment. However, the nature of this protection is continually evolving due to

political forces and shifting constitutional interpretations. For much of our nation’s

DESCRIBE THE MAJOR

FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS

RELATED TO FREEDOM

OF SPEECH

Full_05_APT_64431_ch04_102-147.indd 117 16/11/18 1:28 PM