Criminal Law Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963)

Facts: Edwards v. South Carolina is based upon an event that occurred on March 2, 1961. This is when 187 people peacefully marched upon the state capital of South Carolina to voice their problems with the inequalities facing African-Americans. After being ordered to disperse, they were arrested under the charge breach of the peace. They sued the state (in 1961) claiming that they violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The evidence showed that there was no threat of violence directed at public safety or the officers involved. Instead, the protestors sang patriotic and religious songs in unison. ("Edwards v. South Carolina," 2011)

Issue: The main issue was; does the state have the right to enforce these laws when someone is peacefully demonstrating. Moreover, do they have the right to publically assemble in order to highlight their views to elected officials. ("Edwards v. South Carolina," 2011)

Decision: The U.S. Supreme Court found that the state of South Carolina was in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The law infringed upon the protestors rights, to peacefully bring grievances to elected officials. At the same time, the state cannot punish someone for these actions (under the Fourteenth Amendment). This protects these freedoms against state laws which are enforced. ("Edwards v. South Carolina," 2011)

Reasoning: The ruling was based on the fact that no one was a threat to public safety and they were singing songs.

Dissenting Opinion: Justice Clark wrote the dissenting opinion, as believed that the state has the right to establish laws protecting public safety. That is designed to control when someone is allowed to protest and assemble. ("Edwards v. South Carolina," 2011)

Adderley v. Florida, 385 U.S. 39 (1966)

Facts: Adderley v. Florida, is when 30 students were arrested for demonstrating against racial segregation at a Florida county jail...

They were clapping, singing and dancing after the sheriff advised them that they were trespassing on public property and preventing the operation of the facility. ("Adderley v. Florida," 2013)
Issues: The main issue is do protestors have the right to assemble and voice their grievances in front of any public building or facility. ("Adderley v. Florida," 2013)

Decision: In a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the arrest. ("Adderley v. Florida," 2013)

Reasoning: This is because detention centers and jails were not public places. Therefore, protesting upon them was not infringing upon their right to assembly. ("Adderley v. Florida," 2013)

Dissenting opinions: The dissenting views, did not believe that these individuals were intending any kind of violence directed at the facility or blocking the entrance. They think that public officials do not have the right to decide what facilities are subject to First Amendment protections (based upon this classification). ("Adderley v. Florida," 2013)

U.S. v. Wise, 221 F.3d 140 (5th Cir. 2000)

Facts: The facts of U.S. v. Wise started in 1997 and went into 1998. This is when members of the militia group the Republic of Texas were planning on sending biological agents to different government officials. They were utilizing these tactics to show how they had declared war on the federal government. The FBI was able to conduct the investigation using a confidential informant. He provided them with detailed information about the group's activities. ("U.S. v. Wise," 2010)

Issue: The main issue was did the FBI have enough information to convict two of the men involved in the plot based upon the testimony of a confidential informant. ("U.S. v. Wise," 2010)

Decision: The 5th Appellate Court found that the testimony was not enough to convict these individuals beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, their primary evidence against them was from hearsay and could have easily been taken…