The research topic addressed in this project was the constitutional protections of the “fighting words” exception to the First Amendment and reevaluating constitutional protections for this category of speech. This research aimed to contextualize the fighting words classification of speech within recent Supreme Court decisions, legal scholarship, and the greater research into the harms of hate speech on individuals. This research was conducted by reading relevant court cases, both federal and state supreme court decisions, as well as legal research, and social science research. In conducting this research, I found that the fighting words doctrine remains a present restriction on speech in state courts and serves a valuable purpose in protecting individuals from the real harms that can be caused by speech. This being said, the fighting words category of speech needs to be carefully drawn to only proscribe a narrowly tailored category of speech, including by ensuring that speech restrictions do not discriminate on the basis of viewpoint, which is something the Supreme Court and other courts have struggled with since the doctrine’s inception.
Global conflicts arise when power imbalances create tensions that can escalate into war. In World War II, the invasion of Poland in 1939 reignited the Axis and Allied struggle. While historians widely acknowledge the causes of the war, they often focus more on genocide, particularly of the Roma people. This study examines the impact of Allied intentions on the Roma genocide, emphasizing political censorship in East Germany. We qualitatively analyzed constitutional law concerning foreign relations and humanitarian crises. By comparing U.S. democratic principles, such as the First Amendment, with Eastern European authoritarian regimes, we assessed the role of international relations in genocide and justice. The Nazi rise to power and Soviet influence deepened divisions and censorship, leaving many in East Germany unaware of the atrocities occurring across Europe. The Roma people were rendered voiceless as Nazi forces exterminated them en masse. The Soviet Union’s suppression of information about these crimes contributed to their historical obscurity. Our research highlights how censorship shaped global awareness of the Roma genocide, demonstrating its lasting impact on historical memory and justice efforts.
The research project aims to discuss how modern “Trumpism” simply reflects broader historical issues in America. Political polarization is often blamed for continued political deadlock, especially within the American federal representative democracy, where two parties dominate the political climate. Through the historical examination of the electoral college, insight can be gained on why these issues exist today. This study draws on congressional data and historical records to analyze their impact on these problems. Diversifying American sociopolitical, economic, and cultural frameworks also beckons further study. Creating a third political party will strengthen American democracy by providing more popular choices. Therefore, American political cynicism can be dissuaded with other mainstream political parties.
Despite only making up 13% of the American population, Black Americans comprise 53% of the 3,466 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations (NRE). There has been minimal criminological research conducted exploring how race impacts exonerations. Throughout history evidence of differential treatment in prescribing penalties for people convicted of sexual assault depending on race is well documented in statutes, disparities in execution data, and the presence and impact of lynch mobs. This study explores the intersections of race and sexual assault wrongful convictions. Using a content analysis of the 387 sexual assault wrongful conviction cases included in the NRE, a mixed-methods analytical approach considered: (a) victim and offender case demographics, (b) types of contributing factors present, (c) victim-offender relationship, and (d) how race impacts the narratives and outcomes.
This research is titled American Islamophobia: What Does the History of American Nativism Teach Us? The study is predicated on examining the treatment of other minority groups in American history. We look to see if any trends exist between groups, and if lessons of assimilation and tolerance can be applied to American Muslims. This research coincides with a period of Islamophobia which has been increasing since 9/11. Case studies were the primary methodology of the research. We examined immigration waves throughout American history: the Irish, Chinese, non-Western Europeans, Japanese, and Latin influxes. These are then compared to the modern realities of Muslim immigration. We find that the same xenophobic arguments reoccur for every wave, divided into economic, social/racial/cultural, and political fears. We find that immigrants have constantly been used as scapegoats in times of national distress. In addition, we find American politics to be rather paranoid. A tolerant nation requires alleviating the underpinnings of nativism: economic insecurity, homogenous interactions, media literacy, and immigration reform.
One of the most controversial topics of conversation among scholars and a lay audience in the United States is how much protection the First Amendment should give people, specifically regarding freedom of speech. The political theory aspect of this project focused on what paternalism is and its potential uses through Mill’s “On Liberty”, Dworkin’s “Paternalism,” and secondary literature that discusses freedom of speech in a paternalistic context. The legal aspect of this project focused on court cases that showcased people’s thoughts on the limitations of one’s freedom of speech. Through my research, I found that paternalism, in theory, could be used to limit someone’s freedom of speech if they are under the age of majority; however, limiting an adult’s freedom of speech has not been successfully done in the courts. This is due to the difficulty of proving that by limiting an adult’s freedom of speech, the government is saving the person from themselves while also not violating the Harm Principle set out by Mill.
The aim of this project is to research and conceptualize the current as well as historical nuance of the tolerance of religion. The question this research will answer is whether society should embrace a more tolerant view of religion and instill the views of free speech and religion into the younger generation. This research comes at a time of significant differences among the population surrounding the topic of freedom of religion. Although many Americans continue to embrace the freedom of conscience behind the First Amendment, there is increasing polarization around how far religious freedom should go, which freedoms “count” as religious, and how the religious and irreligious should coexist with one another. This project's approach will use political theory, constitutional law, and historical writings to examine this question. The political theory aspect will characterize views of tolerance within scholarly works and how it applies to religious expression. The findings will be used to evaluate the standing of tolerance in today’s discourse and attempt to find changes. The findings of the research conclude that tolerance is still a heavily raised issue and has been since political discourse entered into the sphere of human interaction.
As modern thought has transitioned from religious to scientific research, there has been a hard line driven down the middle of the two branches suggesting that the two cannot exist with one another. In the 21st century, the idea that science is the only accurate way to perceive the world is one of the most dominant views, relegating mysticism and religion to a separate corner, unrelated to science, but this is contrary to a very long human tradition of mystical practices. Even though science is the dominant school of thought, there are still millions to billions of people globally who participate in faith practices across religions and spiritualities, so what continues to draw people to faith? The researchers conduct interviews across faith practices and beliefs to gain a deeper understanding of what compels people to follow ideas inconsistent with modern thought. Through a mixture of answers from positive psychology, natural expression, and human connection, the beginnings of an answer may be found.
Building on prior sexual abuse research that has retrospectively examined sexual abuse in institutional settings, this project examined files from the Boy Scouts of America “Ineligible Volunteer” database. Through a retrospective content analysis, the research team analyzed BSA files of 49 individuals in Wisconsin deemed “ineligible volunteers” by the organization. Several patterns emerged from the content analysis. This poster introduces multiple case studies that highlight various patterns of institutional abuse observed in the BSA IV files. Implications of the results and directions for future research also are discussed.
Everyday policing during the pandemic was both critical and challenging. A handful of studies focus on COVID-19 in relationship to the change of police officer’s perceptions toward police performance and departmental change. This study attempts to identify perceived differences between pre-COVID and post-COVID policing. This research utilizes four domains: Normal Policing, COVID-19 Policing, Protective Measures, as well as, Gender Roles and Social Ostracization, to distinguish key differences in policing. To achieve the objective, this qualitative research conducted a semi-structured interview process with local front-line officers in the State of Wisconsin. Preliminary results indicated substantial changes between normal policing and COVID-19 policing. Moreover, police officers perceived differences in how protective measures were being enforced differently at the departmental level and at the individual level. Officers expressed changes in shift structure resulted in animosity between day and night scheduled officers. Finally, police officers sensed how gender roles and social ostracization could affect the atmosphere of departments and police performance. Future work should investigate if these departmental changes are generalizable.
