Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Free Speech and Widmar V. Vincent. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 7 page paper examines the case of of U.S. Supreme Court Widmar V. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981) 454 U.S. 263 concerning the meeting of a religious group on university grounds, The paper outlines the case, looks at the resulting impact and considers if this was the right decision. The bibliography cites 4 sources.
Page Count:
7 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS14_TEwidmar1.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
far reaching impacts. The case impacts on the status of smaller groups within a community. In this case the plaintiffs who had been using facilities at the University of Missouri
at Kansas City as a meeting place for a student group; Cornerstone. This was a religious group who, after meeting since 1973, under a policy of the university that provided
facilities for student groups, were told they could not longer meet on university premises as their meeting was one which contravened a regulation that the university property should not
be used to provide a place for religious education or religious worship. The status of the Cornerstone group was that which was impacted. Members of the student group took
action against the university, claiming that this baring of their meetings breached the fundamental constitution right to free speech and freedom to worship. The university cited the regulations which they
had adopted to meet with the "Establishment Clauses" in the state and federal constitution under which the church and the state needed to be separated (Siegel, 1993) Therefore we see
it is not only this group that could be impacted by the judgment, but any religious student group as this may be an issue that directly impacted on Cornerstone, but
could equally impact on any religious group wanting to use any public grounds, or grounds that are made public to hold a religious meeting, especially where this has been an
existing practice. The university grounds here were open to be used by any approved student group and as such this may also be seen as extending in importance to any
student group due to the findings and the grounds for the findings (Siegel,. 1993). The initial court agreed with the university and stated that not only was the
...