- In 1940, the Supreme Court decided Minersville School District v. Gobitis. Just three years later, in 1943, the Supreme Court decided West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. Both cases arose out of the refusal of children to salute the flag based on their religious beliefs. The Supreme Court, in Gobitis, upheld the expulsion of the children due to their refusal to salute the flag. The Supreme Court, in Barnette, overruled Gobitis and found the West Virginia statute requiring children to salute the flag to be unconstitutional. It is very rare for the Supreme Court to completely change its position on an issue in so short a period of time. Why do you think this happened?
- In Prince v. Massachusetts (1944), the Court was confronted with the following situation: Mrs. Prince permitted children in her care to distribute Jehovah’s Witness literature on a street corner. Massachusetts’ child labor laws prohibited children from selling newspapers, magazines or periodicals on any street or public place. Mrs. Prince was prosecuted and convicted and argued that the statute violated her freedom of religion. The Court, in an opinion written by Justice Black, decided that it did not. Justice Murphy dissented. Who do you agree with – Justice Black (in the majority) or Justice Murphy (in dissent). Why?
- The question before the Supreme Court in Torcaso v. Watkins (1961) was whether the State of Maryland could require a notary public, as a condition of receiving his or her commission, to swear to an oath expressing the “belief in the existence of God.” This meant that an atheist could not become a notary public. The Supreme Court declared the statute to be unconstitutional. The State of Maryland argued that Torcaso’s rights were not violated because no one had a right to hold public office. What is your view with regard to this argument?
- In Sherbert v. Verner (1963), the Supreme Court held that a state could only burden the free exercise of religion if to do so would achieve a “compelling state interest” and that there was no less restrictive means to accomplish the compelling state interest. In Employment Division v. Smith (1990), the Supreme Court essentially did away with the Sherbert test and held that “[I]f prohibiting the exercise of religion … is not the object of the [law in question] … but merely the incidental effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid provision, the First Amendment has not been offended.” What is the name of the statute that Congress passed in 1993 to put back in palce the Sherbert “compelling interest” test?
- Here are two examples in which Congress “fixed” a problem created by a Supreme Court opinion. In Employment Division v. Smith (1990), the Supreme Court upheld the denial of unemployment benefits to persons who were dismissed from their jobs
because they ingested a hallucinogenic (peyote) for religious purposes at a ceremony of the Native American Church. In 1994, Congress passed amendments to the American Indian Religious Freedom Act which made lawful the use of peyote for bona fide ceremonial purposes in connection with the practice of a traditional Indian religion. In Goldman v. Weinberger (1986), the Supreme Court upheld an Air Force policy which prohibited an Orthodox Jewish serviceman from wearing a yarmulke (a skullcap) while on duty. Justice Brennan, in dissent, stated: “The Court and the military have refused these servicemen their constitutional rights; we must hope that Congress will correct this wrong.” That is precisely what happened. In 1988, Congress passed a statute that stated that “a member of the armed forces may wear an item of religious apparel while wearing the uniform of the member’s armed force.” These are two examples in which Congress stepped in to pass a statute to effectively nullify the impact of a Supreme Court decision. Earlier in the course, however, we studied Marbury v. Madison (1803), which held that the Supreme Court was the ultimate authority on issues of constitutionality. Here’s the question: Explain how Congress could have acted in these matters without violating the principle that the Supreme Court – not Congress – is the ultimate authority on issues of constitutionality?
Compelling correspondence is essential to the achievement all things considered but since of the changing idea of the present working environments, successful correspondence turns out to be more troublesome, and because of the numerous impediments that will permit beneficiaries to acknowledge the plan of the sender It is restricted. Misguided judgments.In spite of the fact that correspondence inside the association is rarely completely open, numerous straightforward arrangements can be executed to advance the effect of these hindrances.
Concerning specific contextual analysis, two significant correspondence standards, correspondence channel determination and commotion are self-evident. This course presents the standards of correspondence, the act of general correspondence, and different speculations to all the more likely comprehend the correspondence exchanges experienced in regular daily existence. The standards and practices that you learn in this course give the premise to additionally learning and correspondence.
This course starts with an outline of the correspondence cycle, the method of reasoning and hypothesis. In resulting modules of the course, we will look at explicit use of relational connections in close to home and expert life. These incorporate relational correspondence, bunch correspondence and dynamic, authoritative correspondence in the work environment or relational correspondence. Rule of Business Communication In request to make correspondence viable, it is important to follow a few rules and standards. Seven of them are fundamental and applicable, and these are clear, finished, brief, obliging, right, thought to be, concrete. These standards are frequently called 7C for business correspondence. The subtleties of these correspondence standards are examined underneath: Politeness Principle: When conveying, we should build up a cordial relationship with every individual who sends data to us.
To be inviting and polite is indistinguishable, and politeness requires an insightful and amicable activity against others. Axioms are notable that gracious “pay of graciousness is the main thing to win everything”. Correspondence staff ought to consistently remember this. The accompanying standards may assist with improving courtesy:Preliminary considering correspondence with family All glad families have the mystery of progress. This achievement originates from a strong establishment of closeness and closeness. Indeed, through private correspondence these cozy family connections become all the more intently. Correspondence is the foundation of different affiliations, building solid partners of obedient devotion, improving family way of life, and assisting with accomplishing satisfaction (Gosche, p. 1). In any case, so as to keep up an amicable relationship, a few families experienced tumultuous encounters. Correspondence in the family is an intricate and alluring marvel. Correspondence between families isn’t restricted to single messages between families or verbal correspondence.
It is a unique cycle that oversees force, closeness and limits, cohesiveness and flexibility of route frameworks, and makes pictures, topics, stories, ceremonies, rules, jobs, making implications, making a feeling of family life An intelligent cycle that makes a model. This model has passed ages. Notwithstanding the view as a family and family automatic framework, one of the greatest exploration establishments in between family correspondence centers around a family correspondence model. Family correspondence model (FCP) hypothesis clarifies why families impart in their own specific manner dependent on one another ‘s psychological direction. Early FCP research established in media research is keen on how families handle broad communications data. Family correspondence was perceived as an exceptional scholastic exploration field by the National Communications Association in 1989. Family correspondence researchers were at first impacted by family research, social brain science, and relational hypothesis, before long built up the hypothesis and began research in a family framework zeroed in on a significant job. Until 2001, the primary issue of the Family Communication Research Journal, Family Communication Magazine, was given. Family correspondence is more than the field of correspondence analysts in the family. Examination on family correspondence is normally done by individuals in brain science, humanism, and family research, to give some examples models. However, as the popular family correspondence researcher Leslie Baxter stated, it is the focal point of this intelligent semantic creation measure making the grant of family correspondence special. In the field of in-home correspondence, correspondence is normally not founded on autonomous messages from one sender to one beneficiary, yet dependent on the dynamic interdependency of data shared among families It is conceptualized. The focal point of this methodology is on the shared trait of semantic development inside family frameworks. As such, producing doesn’t happen in vacuum, however it happens in a wide scope of ages and social exchange.
Standards are rules end up being followed when performing work to agree to a given objective. Hierarchical achievement relies significantly upon compelling correspondence. So as to successfully impart, it is important to follow a few standards and rules. Coming up next are rules to guarantee powerful correspondence: clearness: lucidity of data is a significant guideline of correspondence. For beneficiaries to know the message plainly, the messages ought to be sorted out in a basic language. To guarantee that beneficiaries can without much of a stretch comprehend the importance of the message, the sender needs to impart unmistakably and unhesitatingly so the beneficiary can plainly and unquestionably comprehend the data.>