The First Amendment Analysis

1673 Words7 Pages

At the core of the First Amendment, a promise is made by The Constitution of the United States, stating “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” (Cornell University Law School, 2015). It is a promise made to all citizens that they will be given the right to practice their beliefs and join together in protest or peacefully assemble. This ability for everyone on the nation - even the minorities - to make themselves heard is an essential part of a functioning democracy (American Civil Liberties Union, 2015). Time and …show more content…

In 1913, between five thousand to eight thousand people assembled on Pennsylvania Avenue and marched past the White House as part of the movement for women’s suffrage, successfully leading to wider support. And in 1963, more than 250,000 people took place in the March on Washington, creating the largest human rights demonstration in U.S. history. The event brought so many together that it pressured the federal government to act against discrimination and create civil rights legislation (Shay, 2012). It’s evident that when officials – and the majority – refuse to listen to what the people have to say, assembling the people that an issue affects is one of the most valuable tools that is available. It brings solidarity to the problem and shows just how important it truly is to so many Americans, as well as bringing more attention of the media and attracting further …show more content…

But that is rarely the truth behind protests (Lerman & Weaver, 2014). When the main goal behind covering a story is to capture the attention of the audience, reporters often focus on the most extreme cases that occur amongst the minority of protests. Occasionally things do go badly during protests, at times groups of specific individuals can get violent. However, projecting the image of violence onto all protesters and their supporters because of the actions of a few unstable individuals fundamentally misrepresents the true majority, and clouds the true nature and importance of public protests (Lerman & Weaver, 2014). The majority of protesters act well within their legal limits, remain peaceful, and do not provoke police. Their only goal is to speak up and have their message be heard. No one should be punished for simply expressing their views (Portland Community College,