Part A Response Section:

Prompt: In the space provided below, please describe your academic and personal interest in
social justice and advocacy. (SHORT RESPONSE, 2-3 sentences) *
I am active in Planned Parenthood’s Teen Council, and have been given the opportunity to
participate in rallies, lobbying, and workshops about political, social, and reproductive issues.
One of my duties is to speak to middle school and high school students about healthy
relationships and provide factual information. With two younger sisters, I find that the social
issues apply very much to my life as well as theirs.

Part B Prompt:
The ACLU has been involved in more Supreme Court cases than any other organization. In your
opinion, which Supreme Court case has had the greatest impact (positively or negatively) on the
modern notion of civil rights and/or civil liberties? (You do not need to describe the case(s) in
detail. Instead, focus most of your answer on your opinion of the case’s impact.) In the space
provided, please submit an essay responding to ONE of the following prompts (LONGER
RESPONSE, no more than 500 words)
Voltaire once said, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it.” I believe that the ACLU has demonstrated that they stand by this statement. No
case has illustrated this better than that of Smith v. Collin. In the 1978 case, a Nazi group was
denied a permit to march in the village of Skokie, a suburb in Chicago. This case is arguably one
of the most controversial cases the ACLU has filed. They represented Collin and the National
Socialist Party of America, and won, allowing the march. Many people were outraged by this
ruling, feeling betrayed by the court they had believed stood for tolerance and equality. But it is
said that justice is blind, and the Constitution does not allow the courts to pick and choose whose
civil liberties are defended.
I am an activist and I stand by my opinion that government censorship has no place in our
society. Sometimes the First Amendment protects people who say and believe hateful things.
By no means do I support what any white supremacist group believes in or stands for. But the
Constitution guarantees civil liberties to citizens, and those cannot be mitigated in any way. I
believe that in the case of Smith v. Collin freedom of speech and freedom of assembly were
protected.
The modern notion of civil liberties often involves the opinion that the government must
limit people on what they are able to say. These limits include censoring hateful things, or not
allowing people to assemble in public places if the things being said are controversial. I
understand that people are infuriated if those representing a movement pushing for racial
equality are prevented from assembling. But when it comes to the KKK or other white
supremacist groups, people are infuriated if they aren’t prevented from assembling. The ideas
both organizations stand for are different in every way possible, but when it comes to civil
liberties, the Constitution cannot have double standards. Both groups are granted the civil liberty
allowing them to assemble, and allowing them the freedom of speech; race, gender, age and
political standing should have no impact on the rights they are granted. The same inalienable
rights are granted to both groups because they have one thing in common; they are citizens of the
United States of America.
I believe that censorship anywhere to anyone is a violation of their civil liberties. This
case violated the right to assembly for a group advocating actions that would infringe on the
rights of others. We depend on society as a whole to reject said actions, but defend the right to
advocate. Censorship is not defined by what group of people are being censored, it is defined by
the act of censoring any group of people. Our democracy remains open and free because of the
ACLU’s vision. In Smith v. Collin the ACLU positively impacted the modern notion of civil
liberties.