Religion & American Law

             The article I found is about a Florida pastor bashing Islam. Pastor Terry Jones stood in front of the biggest mosque in Michigan protesting. He claimed that the growing population of Muslims in the United States would lead to the oppression of everyone who is not a Muslim. Jones made statements such as, “Muslims, no matter where they go around the world… they push their agenda on the society. We must take back American.” Michigan police department placed the mosque in lockdown to prevent any harm from occurring. Jones’s previous visits had resulted in arrest and street clashes, which is why the mosque was on lockdown.

            Jones was also worried about the free speech rights of Americans. This past year Jones was arrested in front of the mosque and a Dearborn City Judge ordered him to stay away from the mosque for three years. A Detroit Judge later overturned this decision. Last month Jones was asked to sign a legal argument before protesting in front of the mosque. Once again Jones filled a lawsuit, and a Detroit federal judge ruled in his favor. Many supporters of Jones made statements such as, “sharia law is the most dangerous thing. We can’t have it in this country.” Jones, who was a pastor in Germany, also makes claims that Islamic Laws are taking over the world.

            The Jones case is similar to a Supreme Court case from 1940. In the case Cantwell v. Connecticut, Newton Cantwell and his two sons were arrested for proselytizing in a heavily Roman Catholic neighborhood. They were going door to door with books and pamphlets; they also had a portable phonograph with them. They were charged with not obtaining a certificate before soliciting funds from the public and inciting a breach of peace. The Cantwells believed that obtaining a certificate from the city was a violating their First Amendment right to free exercise of religion and speech. The court ruled in favor of Cantwell. They said Cantwell’s actions were protected by both the first and fourteenth amendments.

            This case is significant to the current case because Jones was expressing his first amendment rights. Prior to Cantwell v. Connecticut the Supreme Court had not legally clarified the extent of the First Amendment. The Detroit judge who overturned the Jones case ruling may have had Cantwell case in mind. Another similarity between the two is the city asked Jones to sign a legal agreement before protesting. When Jones filed a lawsuit, a federal judge ruled in his favor. In Cantwell v. Connecticut the Justice Roberts stated that one does not need to obtain a license for proselytizing.

            This case shows how important it is for the Supreme Court to clarify laws, and Amendments. Since Cantwell v. Connecticut clarified the first amendment the two lower level judges in the Jones case were able to make a quick ruling. Jones was within his rights to make the claims he did, and he was protected by the first amendment. What I am confused about is, why Jones is worried that the free speech amendment is going to be violated. In his case, he was protected by free speech, so why does he believe Americans are going to have their free speech revoked?