Interpretation of the first amendment to the constitution USA

USA First Amendment to the Constitution1791Years)The full text is "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""The Federal Parliament not legislation establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of legislation; or abridging the freedom of speech and publication; shall not deprive people of peaceful assembly or to petition the government for a redress of rights to petition." The main explanation for:

Interpretation, the main content (the "four no")

(a) shall not establish religious legislation

The meaning and purpose of this provision, the two views of the main court decisions have. A kind of thought, the provision is intended to prohibit the state or federal government preferential treatment or discrimination in some religion or sect, that is to say, the government should treat all religions or religious equality; another view is that the clause, to realize the separation of church and state, to the government and the Church (Religion) between erecting a fence in order to prevent government involvement in religious affairs.

(two) no law prohibiting the free exercise

This article also has two levels of meaning: first, no legislation to force people to believe in a religion or a sect; the second, ensuring the freedom of religious activities, and of course the freedom not to do as one pleases, to protect the legitimate religious freedom, rather than the abuse of freedom.

(three) or abridging the freedom of speech and publication

The freedom of the press is to limit is not patient in published before, rather than after the publication of even involve criminal problem can be immune from punishment. Everyone has the right to express their preferences in front of the public, forbidden was the destruction of the freedom of the press. However, if his publications harmful and illegal, he must bear the responsibility.

1, some special forms of free speech case:

(1The peaceful demonstration).Not simply to demonstrate equivalent to the exercise of free speech, although the state court and legislature can not empty banned all demonstrations, however, they can to prohibit any demonstration according to the specific reason.

(2Symbolic speech).Such statements as a form of expression, including speech elements, including non speech elements. Typically involves treating the flag or soldier card in some way case. In many flag burning cases, courts have sustained a government penalties in most cases.

(3Pledge of allegiance).Although the people of the pledge of allegiance in preventing the overthrow of the government's function in doubt, however, some legislative requirements are still not to mind taking the trouble to accept a job should take an oath before. For some it is, swear must promise not to advocate the overthrow of the government behavior, therefore, the surface, the words would be a violation of the freedom of speech. If this kind of oath as a condition of employment, the court will generally declared it unconstitutional.

(4) campaign.In the1974Years, in order to prevent running scandals, Congress has on contributions and expenditures do limit amount. The court thinks, the contributions of this restriction is unconstitutional, but, on the spending limits are violated the first amendment.

(5Private violations of freedom of speech).Public authorities in violation of personal freedom of speech in the case, the court will generally support the rights of individuals. However, for individual freedom of expression cases, courts are not so keen. The basic idea of the court is, the first amendment does not prohibit private violations of freedom of speech. So, in private employer for employees to3KThe party terminating the employment of the case, the court supported the practices of the employer.

2Freedom of the press, relates to cases mainly has the following form:

(1The obscene publications).In such cases, be consistent from beginning to end, unable to establish the standard, but only in the case of specific identification.

(2).Whether in the libel case, the key problem is to distinguish whether the victim is a public official or public figure. If it is a public official or public figure, constitutes libel standard is very strict, in practice the more influential standards are "fair comment" (Fair comment), that is to say, not speech light right not slander, and even if it is inconsistent with the facts of speech, if the words are not "actual malice", also cannot count the libel. This is in order to fully guarantee the political debate, and to the public figure Kejia more heavy burden. However, if the victim is private, then constitute defamation standards will not be so strict. Visible, in such cases, the actual involving conflicts between the freedom of the press and the right of privacy.

(3) band and fair principle of equal distribution station.As Congress agent Federal Communications Commission regulations, in order to allow people to express different opinions, to arrange the same radio time for different views, this is called the fair principle, the court will support such provisions in many cases.

(4) journalist's privilege.The focus of such cases, in order to guarantee the freedom of the press and the people at the exchange of information, whether it can be assigned to the journalists from the court testimony and other privileges.

(four) shall not deprive people of peaceful assembly or to petition the government for a redress of right to petition.

To support the court limited this kind of right reason outside notting have is to maintain order, however, this right does not want to Shangjie, so, the court needs to do is, rallies and demonstrations what time and what place is must be protected. A special form of such cases have:

1Civil servants, government restrictions on freedom of association.The basic attitude of the court is to provide a neutral, services for their own civil servants, not like ordinary citizens as free association, however, is not in accordance with the special idea to arbitrary dismissal of civil servants.

2, participation in elections.This kind of case is involved, the law in specific time before the election, the voter registration requirements of their own preferences, is a violation of the first amendment rights.

Two, the important meaning

(a) the first amendment establishment of political principle of separation of church and state.

The relationship between politics and religion is western and even the history of human civilization the last and its complex and important relationship, from the date of human society, is bound to face this problem, and how to resolve the tension between them, but also constitutes an important institutional standards of human society can survive. Because it involves two important aspects: one is as a spiritual animal, there is a spiritual pursuit and sustenance, its core support is religion, which constitute the so-called political relations in the religious dimension; on the other hand, man is a political animal, or social animal, from the beginning to participate in some social or community organization exists, the social structure has become the relationship between politics and religion in the political dimension. In the history of mankind, serious problem lies in social governance governance and human spirit of religion and politics or people, are not entirely consistent, and that the human form of life in the history had existed for quite some time, but with the historical change of today has become the past. Separation of religion and politics, even contradiction and conflict, which is an important topic since the rise of modern nation states, also called a prominent symbol of modernity.

(two) the first amendment is clear separation of church and state way.

And how to separate? This is a key issue, in fact as early as in the ancient and medieval about the separation of church and state also have been discussed a lot, the so-called Jesus to Jesus, Kaiser to Kaiser, said also separation. However, we see, the America First Amendment to the constitution principle of separation of church and state, and they are different, it is to solve the problem of the relationship between politics and religion complex and difficult in a completely new way, has three layers of meaning of political philosophy:

1, it established the principle of separation of church and state, is one kind of public political domain based on separation. That is to say that the first amendment of the separation of church and state and the separation is not absolute and unconditional, also did not pursue the deep problems that cannot be achieved in human society, perhaps politics is fundamentally not separated. Separation of this saying is at a political level, the separation system framework of national governance adjustment in a constitution within, so that separation is a limited separation, separation of a negative, a separation and the human society tremendous contradictions and conflicts qualified to cut and bridged in a range of political strategy. So, for the separation of church and state we should be aware of this basic characteristic of foundation platform of public political level it, otherwise is the misunderstanding of the principle of separation of church and state.

2Isolation, limited, or that the separation of church and state public politically can become possible, and look from the history, it really American and even in the whole modern human political culture to achieve, we see the world today, up to the range in the real society, constitution system effectively solves the politics and religion the scale of the conflict, to avoid the terrible disaster, which are the two basic principles that relies on the separation of church and state, and the two principle is the two principles embodied in the first amendment to the constitution of American.

3Two, the principle of the first amendment to the constitution are not diametrically opposed, it is a kind of new integrated, that is to say each other two principles of the first amendment, balance and coordination of the two principles, constitute the integrity of the amendment of the constitution, and it is the tension in the integrity and so American flexibly according to the reality of the situation to be in handling the relationship between politics and religion in. Historical practice has proved, USA two hundred years the relationship between church and state have been able to healthy development and did not appear big question, two principles of the key is also on the amendment contained rich and an inherent tension of a integrity.

(three) the profound meaning of the first amendment to the Constitution shall set up the two principles of teaching Chinese and religious freedom.

From the perspective of political philosophy, it has surpassed the relationship between religion and politics in the narrow, some fundamental questions and touches the human society and human civilization, such as human rights, political system. And in the final analysis, is the most critical problem of social governance and spiritual governance relate to the way people. The principle of freedom of religion and of the separation of church and state principle America First Amendment makes America in political system effectively solved a major problem in traditional European history, is one of the most important and the greatest gift America constitutionalism to the world of human civilization, this not only for western society has great significance but for us today, the China society, for how we view and solve the problem of the relationship between church and state China in modern society and religious freedom, have a reference.

-- --2007Years9Month18In Chengdu