Posted on: May 13, 2011
Welcome to Project Artistic Freedom
This blog was created by Jennifer Cichocki and Melissa Stanley as a project for COMM418: Topics in Freedom of Expression. Its purpose is to further educate you on the legal limitations of public artistic expression. We hope to teach you some basic laws and court cases that have established precedent for artistic expression issues. In addition to teaching you, we would like to learn from you. Upon the completion of our project we would like to analyze general trends in your comments and how that translates into discrepancies between the current law and public opinion.
We’d like to thank you for your time and encourage you to please leave any comments you may have. They are very much appreciated.
If you have any questions feel free to contact us:
Melissa Stanley: stanleym@udel.edu
Jennifer Cichocki: cichocki@udel.edu
AMENDMENT 1
“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.”
Case 10
Posted on: May 13, 2011
Jeffrey Shearn recently put together and edited a short independent film. He obtained the correct license in order to show the film at the Sundance Festival. A scene in his motion picture shows an adult man urinating on the side of a Catholic church. A few people who had seen the film prior to its showing at Sundance have complained that it is sacrilegious. Should Shearn be able to show his picture at the festival? Can the license he obtained in order to show the film be revoked due to the reaction to this particular scene in the film? Leave your comments and then see what we think.
Case 8
Posted on: May 12, 2011
Daniel Goldsmith is an Australian artist who recently showed some of his paintings in a local museum and was quickly becoming quite popular. The paintings in the exhibit portrayed adult nudity and sexual encounters. He then packaged and shipped these paintings to the United States where they were to be displayed in a new art exhibit in Manhattan. Upon their arrival, U.S. Customs agents seized the paintings because they were thought to violate the federal law prohibiting the importation of obscene materials. Can Goldsmith’s paintings be kept from being shown in the exhibit on these grounds? Does this constitute prior restraint? Leave your comments and then see what we think.
Case 7
Posted on: May 11, 2011
Laura McDonald is an artist from New York City. The city has a law that says vendors in Central Park are subject to approval by city officials unless the item being sold expresses a religious or political message. These items do not have to be approved, the city claims, because they are always protected by the First Amendment. Laura want’s to sell her paintings in Central Park and she does not believe that she needs approval from the city even though he paintings do not contain any religious or political message. The city sues Laura for illegally selling paintings.
Is this city law constitutional? Do you feel that Laura’s right to sell her paintings without prior approval is protected by the First Amendment? Leave a comment and let us know what you think and then see how we would rule in this situation.
Case 6
Posted on: May 11, 2011
Thomas Jones is a 13 year old student at Holy Cross Middle School, a private school. Using his school administered email address he sends and email to a group of his classmates. In the email he admits that he enjoys listening to music by Ozzy Ozbourne. A parent of one of the students that receives the email reports it to the headmaster of Holly Cross. The headmaster states that this music is completely inappropriate for Thomas and his friends. Without any warning, Thomas Jones is expelled from Holy Cross. His parents are furious that he was kicked out of school for simply sharing his taste in music.
Do they have grounds on which to sue Holy Cross Middle School? Leave us a comment with your thoughts and then head over and check out ours.
Case 5
Posted on: May 11, 2011
A public art gallery in a small town debuts a new exhibit featuring video clips which are projected onto a blank gallery wall. These video clips show explicit sexual acts between adults, and the local court finds the exhibit obscene according to the community standards test. The art gallery, which is losing a great deal of money after being forced to close its main exhibit early, appeals to the Supreme Court. Gallery officials claim that the surrounding community is too conservative, and had the exhibit been shown in a more culturally diverse location, it would have been able to stay open to the public. They argue that the artistic expression of their exhibit can not be censored based on its content.
Should the gallery win the lawsuit? Leave your comments and then see our thoughts.
Case 4
Posted on: May 11, 2011
Anne Clarke recently bought a storefront in the city. She made the space into a gallery in which she displays paintings, photographs, and sculptures created by local artists. She allows these artists to display their work for one month at a flat rate. A different artist is featured on each wall and twice a week, Clarke charges a small admission fee and allows visitors to come see her new gallery. Last week, one of Clarke’s most popular up-and-coming artists, Jamie Lang, hung a photograph on the wall of two women kissing. When Clarke saw the photograph in her gallery, she promptly removed it and called Lang, informing her that she didn’t want “homo-erotic” art displayed in her art gallery. Offended, Lang attempted to sue Anne Clarke on the grounds that her First Amendment rights were violated.
Should Lang win in a lawsuit against Clarke? Did Clarke violate her First Amendment rights by removing her artwork from the gallery based on its content? Leave your comments and then see our thoughts.
Case 2
Posted on: May 9, 2011
James Smith, a well known and appreciated author, writes a new novel that is released in Europe. He would like the book to be published and sold in the United States as well. The story details the life of a young girl and her struggles in life. One chapter focusses on a time in this girl’s life during which she worked as a prostitute. This specific chapter is particularly graphic and sexually explicit. When a religious group reads of copy of the book that was published in Europe, they sue the American publishing company that was in the process of publishing this book. They insist that the book is obscene and should not be published. How do you feel the courts would rule in the case? Are there any tests that the court would use?
Leave your comments and then see what we think!
Project Artistic Freedom 