Q: What was Frankfurter’s Dissent on the case of Barnette (1943)?
Frankfurter’s Dissent
a. Frankfurter defers to the judgment of the West VA legislature. The four previous times the Court dealt with the compulsory flag salute, the Court held it was not beyond the power of the states to enact such a salute.
b. He says the “Clear and Present Danger” test (and the First
Am., for that matter) does not even apply here because “saluting the
flag” is not a restraint on speech.
1. Dave says this is just wrong.
c. If the Jahova’s witnesses have a problem saluting flag, then
they can express their views in public, just like any other citizen.
Are you a lawyer? Or, do you just knoooow the answer?
We have located some similar legal questions and legal question categories. Check out these challenging questions that askquestions about Supreme Court Cases and are similar to What was Frankfurter’s Dissent on the case of Barnette (1943)?. Also, we have included a list of some of our more popular legal question categories. These categories are based on what everyone is asking and answering.
Similar Legal Questions
- Describe the case of Barnette (1943) on Freedom Not to Speak.
- What was the opinion of the majority in the case of Barnette (1943)
- Elaborate on The Free Exercise Clause.
- What is Holmes dissent of free speech?
- What was the court’s holding on the Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education (1977) case?
- How is the Clear and Present Danger” (or “Bad Tendency”) test different from Clear and Imminent Danger” test as proposed by Dave?
- Give two comments made by Dave on proposed theories of free speech.
- What was the opinion of the majority in the Dun & Bradstreet (1985) case?
- What was the opinion of the majority in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.(1974) case?
- What was the approach to Government Employees’ Speech on the Exam under Pickering, Givhan, Connick, and Mt. Healthy?
What's Your Answer to "What was Frankfurter’s Dissent on the case of Barnette (1943)?"