Question

1. a law makes it illegal to burn bibles, but not other books, in public parks. how is this not consistent with the guarantees in the first amendment?

the law is too vague.
the law is not content neutral and gives one book precedence over another.
the law imposes prior restraint.
the law is not the least drastic means available.

1. a law that prohibits indecent material on the internet is put into force. how is this not consistent with the guarantees in the first amendment?

the law imposes prior restraint.
the law is too vague.
the law is not the least drastic means available.
the law is not content neutral.

Explanation:

• For question 9: The First Amendment's Free Speech Clause generally requires content - neutral laws. A law that singles out the Bible (a religious text) for different treatment (making it illegal to burn) while allowing other books to be burned is not content - neutral. It gives preferential or different treatment based on the content (religious vs non - religious) of the book.
• For question 10: The term "indecent" is highly subjective. What one person considers indecent, another may not. A law that is based on such a vague term does not provide clear guidelines for what is prohibited. This lack of clarity violates the First Amendment's requirement for laws to be sufficiently definite so that people can understand what is prohibited.

Answer:

1. The law is not content neutral and gives one book precedence over another.
2. The law is too vague.