Welcome to The Dirksen Congressional Center's Communicator - a web-based e-newsletter providing educators with news and ideas to enhance civic education and improve the understanding of Congress -- http://www.webcommunicator.org

*********************************************
NEWS FROM THE DIRKSEN CENTER
*********************************************

Congressional Research Awards

DEADLINE: Proposals must be postmarked no later than February 1, 2004

The Dirksen Center invites applications for grants to fund research on congressional leadership and the U.S. Congress. A total of up to $35,000 will be available in 2004. Applications are accepted at any time, but the deadline is February 1, 2004, for the annual selections, which are announced in March.

Complete information about eligibility and application procedures may be found at The Center's Web site:
http://www.dirksencenter.org/grantcongresearchaward.htm Frank Mackaman is the program officer -- mailto:fmackaman@dirksencenter.org

Since 1978, the Congressional Research Awards program has paid out $585,000 to support 315 projects.

Open Enrollment -- Dirksen Center Friends

Membership enrollment in The Center's Friends organization is now open. Your $25 annual membership dues will help support a wide range of educational and research programs for scholars, teachers, and students.

Join now and enjoy the benefits listed at: http://www.dirksencenter.org/friends.htm. Instructions for becoming a Dirksen Center Friend can be found at: http://www.dirksencenter.org/friends-membershipform.htm

Civil Liberties: The First Amendment (Freedom of Speech)

What constitutes "speech" itself? One view separates public or political speech from private speech with the latter limited with respect to the rights of others. This issue of Communicator will provide resources to help your students learn more about the First Amendment and freedom of speech.

Learn more about the Supreme Court and how the courts can influence legislation. For example, see how the courts have protected speech in certain circumstances but not all kinds of speech. Find Congress and the Courts at: http://www.congresslink.org/lessonplans/MEDcourts.htm

Learn more about the Supreme Court case that established "clear and present danger" as an acceptable reason for limiting free expression. Find Schenck v. United States (1919) at: http://www.aboutgovernment.org/judicialbranch.htm#supremecourt

The Supreme Court has had to consider laws that restrict nonpolitical public speech. Learn about two historic Supreme Court decisions related to unprotected speech, sometimes called "fighting words." Find Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942) (USSC+) and Street v. New York, 394 U.S. 576 (1969) (USSC+) on AboutGovernment at: http://www.aboutgovernment.org/judicialbranch.htm#supremecourt

Introduce CongressLink's related lesson plan to teach students that some forms of speech involve not words but actions, usually as part of a political protest, and to show students the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting the law and how the courts affect our personal freedoms. Find Symbolic Speech at: http://www.congresslink.org/RelatedLessons.htm

Featured Grant-funded Project

Suppose you would like to develop lesson plans or student activities that will allow students to weigh the rights of students (and others) to free speech versus the responsibilities that come with those rights. Sound intriguing? Consider applying for a Robert H. Michel Civic Education Grant. Find information about the program, including a sample grant proposal and a list of previously awarded grants at: http://www.dirksencenter.org/grantmichelciviced.htm

*NEW* Can you burn the flag? Test your Freedom of Speech knowledge at: http://www.congressforkids.net/games/billofrights/2_billofrights.htm

More Freedom Frenzy

1. Which form of speech did the Supreme Court label as unprotected by the First Amendment in Roth v. US (1957)?

A) Libel
B) Fighting words
C) Symbolic Speech
D) Obscenity

2. Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) provided further protection for dangerous speech by adding what requirement to the clear and present danger test?

A) Lucidity
B) Severity
C) Imminence
D) Sedition

3. Texas v. Johnson (1989) is an important case concerning symbolic speech. Which form of symbolic speech did the Supreme Court uphold in this case?

A) Wearing arm bands in school
B) Cross burning
C) Flag burning
D) Draft card burning

Critical Thinking

The "fighting words" doctrine suggests that a speaker may be silenced because his or her words might provoke a violent retaliation from the listener. This approach to free speech effectively gives the audience the power to silence any message that they consider offensive enough to warrant violence. What do you think? To what extent should government be able to quiet someone in order to protect them from the backlash created by their own words? Is a "fighting words" exception to the First Amendment a dangerous loophole in protection of free expression? Or is it a reasonable relaxation of those protections, available for public authorities when they lack adequate resources to protect an unpopular minority?

Answers to the November issue of Fun, Facts, and Trivia link here: http://www.webcommunicator.org/funfactstrivia1103ans.htm

Happy Holidays! Encourage your colleagues to subscribe to the Communicator. If you have questions, comments, or suggestions, contact Cindy Koeppel at mailto:ckoeppel@dirksencenter.org Your feedback makes a difference!

If you experience any problem, send an e-mail to Cindy Koeppel.