Question

In 1915, the Supreme Court ruled that movies were not protected by the First Amendment; that they were acts of commerce and not speech because they were shipped across state lines for the purpose of doing business. So, from 1915 to 1952 (when the Supreme Court reversed itself and extend First Amendment protection to movies), movies were not covered by the First Amendment. Why did the Court make that ruling?

• A. Because the movie industry was just developing, the Court did not make the connection between movies as a form of communication and therefore their relationship to the 1st Amendment. The Court viewed movies as money-making enterprises and therefore ruled that they are acts of commerce, not protected by the 1st Amendment.

• B. The case the Court was considering had to do not with a free speech question but with a revenue question. Therefore, because the case was not framed as a speech issue, the Court made a ruling that was based on matters concerning revenue and not speech.

• C. Southern Senators and Congressmen did not like boxing movies that showed a black boxer, Jack Johnson, beating a series of white boxers. So they passed a law outlawing boxing movies. The Supreme Court apparently agreed the with rationale behind the law and classified movies as acts of commerce, not acts of speech.

Answer 1

Option A

The court regarded movies as means to conduct business with the purpose of earning profit and cannot be regarded as organ of public opinion.The court even said that it would be unreasonable to grant free speech protection to theatre or circus.

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the right to peaceably assemble, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.