LEB2 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

LEB2 - Essay Example However, foreign firms that organized under the laws of a state other than Alabama were forbidden from similarly negotiating its tax base. These disparities lead to the Reynolds Metal Company to sue the Alabama tax authorities. Reynolds Metal and other sought to be refunded for taxes paid to Alabama on the grounds the state discriminated against foreign companies under the Commerce and Equal Protection Clauses. The Alabama Supreme Court rejected Reynolds’s claim, citing additional burdens on foreign business offset the burdens placed upon domestic businesses. An Alabama trail court confirmed the franchise tax to be discriminatory, but dismissed their claims citing the precedent of the Reynolds case. The U.S. Supreme Court found the state’s franchise taxes against foreign firms to be discriminatory. Further, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded Alabama failed to justify its lack of tax negotiating ability for foreign firms when compared to the burdens placed upon domestic fi rms. Restrictions on freedom of speech On the 200th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights (December 15, 1991), the American Bar Association conducted poll. A mere 33% of those polled successfully identified the bill of rights. (The New York Times) A decade later, sparring senatorial candidates flubbed the identification of elements comprising the First Amendment. (Johnson) In light of these egregious cognitive failings, the common American can identify with the concept of â€Å"Freedom of Speech.† However, these same failings in common constitutional education make it clear that few are aware of the existence of exceptions to freedom of speech. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states in part that â€Å"Congress shall make no law †¦ abridging the freedom of speech†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Contrary to popular belief, this does not provide the right for the individual American to say what he/she wants, when he/she wants, how he/she wants to. While freedom of speech exists, it is provided to the people with restrictions, conditions, and exemptions. The exemption of obscenity is unique in that the Supreme Court has denied First Amendment protections to obscenity without regard to whether it is, or is not harmful to others. It has been determined by the Supreme Court that obscenity â€Å"was outside the protection intended for speech† when the First Amendment was adopted. (ROTH v. UNITED STATES, 354 U.S. 476 (1957) ) This ruling has essentially banned obscenity in the interest of social order and morality. It is important to note that obscenity and pornography are not one in the same. As most pornography is not legally obscene, pornography enjoys First Amendment protections due to the fact it does not have to pass all elements of the Miller Test. (Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 27 (1973)). One could argue that the Supreme Court has set some very profound precedents in the restrictions of freedom of speech, but the restriction s of speech are far more impacting long before the Supreme or any other court hears the case. The Supreme Court has made it clear employees of the government have the right to free speech when addressing matters of public concern. The Supreme Court has also determined it constitutional for the state to both suspend without pay and terminate employees under the guise of efficiency of service when the employee is making false statements against others in government. Many government