why does patent
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, the strongest guarantee of free expression in the world. Unlike people in many other countries, Americans are open to criticism, and any other government in of language also fair and foul, in a racist or other hateful speech, and the use of expletives and other bad language in public. In some states like California, they can exercise their right to freedom of expression to others of the private property. Americans are very proud (some would say unreasonable foreigners) of their right to freedom of expression, most of them believe that it encourages a strong free press which regularly cleanses corruption out of the U.S. government (eg, Watergate) and thus ensures its unique stability.
In the early years of the Republic if the U.S. system of checks and balances, made a daring journalists already established. A bold and sketchy press was an influential force in the rule for termination of an English king and leading colonial America in the revolution against the British Empire. With journalistic freedom protected by 1791 in the Bill of Rights, the press in a self-conscious force in the first decades of the nation. The U.S. media today is often the so-called Fourth Estate, a name, the press on the shares equal stature with the three branches of government, which by the Constitution. But while the press was not as an institution by the U.S. Constitution, which many citizens believe that it is a branch of the U.S. government. Numerous debates are still to press freedom as a watchdog of the American government. Is it protected by law?
Several trials have been critical landmarks in determining the rights of the press to pursue information and to publish government documents or derogatory information about public figures. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the media should be some First Amendment protection from the laws of libel, for fear that the trials and the possible monetary damages might disincline media owners in its entirety of the reporting of public affairs. To qualify for a public figure to win defamation case against a media defendant, the plaintiff must be "actual malice", "the courts as the knowledge that the published statement was false or as reckless disregard of whether it is false or not" ".
In our time, American law of freedom of expression has become an issue of international appeal, because the Internet was another medium of communication. Probably, this is prohibited, since many groups can take advantage of the Internet service provider based in the United States, their messages around the world, even if this speech is prohibited. U.S. courts do not enforce foreign judgments in contradiction to national public policy, including the liberal U.S. policy in the field of free expression. What the U.S. perspective, many Americans do not like attempts by common law countries, for their personal responsibility for the American defendants, whose alleged defamatory speech acts over the Internet and not in these areas. If the First Amendment can not protect what else can? Diplomacy is a solution? The fact remains that the political and social scientists seem to be on the way into uncharted waters.
Kadence Buchanan writes articles on many subjects such as science, education and children and adolescents
0 ความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น