The Oyez Project: Judicial Power Issues - First Amendment Arguments http://www.oyez.org/issues/judicial-power/first-amendment/ U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en-us http://www.oyez.org/images/oyezfeed.jpg U.S. Supreme Court Audio Recordings, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) Wooley v. Maynard - Oral Argument Mon, 29 Nov 1976 12:00:00 -0500 <p>A New Hampshire law required all noncommercial vehicles to bear license plates containing the state motto "Live Free or Die." George Maynard, a Jehovah's Witness, found the motto to be contrary to his religious and political beliefs and cut the words "or Die" off his plate. Maynard was convicted of violating the state law and was subsequently fined and given a jail sentence.</p> <p>Did the New Hampshire law unconstitutionally interfere with the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment?</p> 75-1453_19761129-lq-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1976/1976_75_1453/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Younger v. Harris - Oral Argument Tue, 01 Apr 1969 12:00:00 -0500 <p>California's Criminal Syndicalism Act prohibited advocating, teaching, or aiding the commission of a crime or unlawful acts of violence or terrorism. John Harris, a socialist, was indicted under the statute. Harris claimed the law had a "chilling effect" on his freedom of speech. After a California state court upheld Harris' conviction, a federal district court struck down the Act because of vagueness and overbreadth.</p> <p>Did the federal court, in stopping a prosecution in a state court, violate constitutional principles of federalism?</p> 2_19690401-lq-argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2/argument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist Younger v. Harris - Second Oral Reargument Wed, 29 Apr 1970 12:00:00 -0500 <p>California's Criminal Syndicalism Act prohibited advocating, teaching, or aiding the commission of a crime or unlawful acts of violence or terrorism. John Harris, a socialist, was indicted under the statute. Harris claimed the law had a "chilling effect" on his freedom of speech. After a California state court upheld Harris' conviction, a federal district court struck down the Act because of vagueness and overbreadth.</p> <p>Did the federal court, in stopping a prosecution in a state court, violate constitutional principles of federalism?</p> 2_19701116-lq-reargument2 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_2/reargument/ supreme, court, oyez, rehnquist