#Balancing Individual Rights and Public Safety ⚖️

Let's explore how the Supreme Court juggles individual freedoms with the need for public order—a central theme in our review!

markdown-image

Key Concept

Over time, the Supreme Court has used various legal tests and doctrines to balance individual freedom with laws promoting public order and safety.

#Legal Tests and Doctrines

#Strict Scrutiny

Used for laws restricting fundamental rights (e.g., speech, religion).
Government must show the law is:
- Narrowly tailored
- Serves a compelling state interest

#Intermediate Scrutiny

Applied to laws regulating conduct of lesser importance than fundamental rights.
Government must show the law:
- Serves an important government interest
- Is substantially related to that interest

#Balancing Test

Weighs individual rights against the government's interest in regulation.
Laws that substantially burden individual rights may be struck down.

#Clear and Present Danger Test

Used for speech that incites or creates a risk of imminent lawless action.
Government can restrict speech if it:
- Creates a clear and present danger
- Restriction is necessary to protect against harm 🙅🏻

Memory Aid

Think of it like a ladder: Strict scrutiny is the highest rung, used for the most important rights. Intermediate scrutiny is in the middle, and the balancing test weighs things on a case-by-case basis. The clear and present danger test is like an emergency brake for speech.

Amendments: Balancing Individual Freedom with Public Order and Safety

James Wright