• Clearly state the contested First Amendment questions, that is, the legal claims based on the First Amendment present in the case.
• Clearly summarize all of the First Amendment arguments presented in the opinions. After reading your summary, we should know what the arguments are and where each of the justices stands on them.
• In a third section, explain which opinion gives us the best answers to the First Amendment questions raised in the case.
  
  Your paper should be no longer than three pages, double-spaced.

Grading Criteria

(1) Hate Speech:

• In R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 112 S.Ct. 2538, 120 L.Ed. 2d 305, 1992 U.S. Lexis 3863 (1992), and subsequent cases,the U.S. Supreme Court has struggled to find consensus on the correct analysis of the free speech questions raised by the use of highly offensive racist symbolic speech. Using the opinions in R.A. V. and the other cross-burning cases and other relevant material, detail the arguments presented and provide a conclusion that states and supports the "right" analysis.

(2) Flag Burning:

In Texas v. Johnson, 109 S.Ct. 2533 (1989), and again in United States v. Eichman , 110 S.Ct. 2404 (1990), a divided U.S. Supreme Court held that under certain circumstances flag burning is constitutional. There have been a number of efforts in the U.S. Congress to pass legislation that will outlaw flag burning and meet the requirements of Eichman and Johnson. In the current session of Congress, H. J. RES. 10 has passed the House and is awaiting action in the Senate. The text of the bill reads as follows: "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."

Is H.J. RES. 10 is agreement with the existing Supreme Court precedent regarding flag burning? If so, is H.J. RES 10 good public policy?

(3) Student Publications:

• In Hazelwood Sch. Dst. v. Kuhlmeirer,484 U.S. 260, 108 S. Ct. 562; 1988 U.S. LEXIS 311, 98 L. Ed. 2d 592, 56 U.S.L.W. 4079, 14 Media L. Rep. 2081(1988), a divided U.S. Supreme Court gave school administrators broad authority over the content of school-sponsored publications. In Kincaid v. Gibson, 236 F.3rd. 342 (6th Cir. 2001), a federal court of appeals held that Hazelwood does not apply to college students' expression. In Hosty v. Carter, 325 F.3d 945 (7th Cir. 2003), a three judge panel of the 7th Circuit held that Hazelwood did not apply to college newspapers. However in Hosty v. Carter, _____________(7th Cir. 2005), sitting en banc a seven-judge majority of the court said that that the analysis used by the Supreme Court in the Hazelwood decision was applicable at the public college and university level.

How could the appellate courts reach different conclusions about the status of college newspapers under Hazelwood? Should college newspapers be subject to Hazelwood?