Abington School District List Serve: Fill & Download for Free

GET FORM

Download the form

How to Edit Your Abington School District List Serve Online With Efficiency

Follow the step-by-step guide to get your Abington School District List Serve edited with accuracy and agility:

  • Hit the Get Form button on this page.
  • You will go to our PDF editor.
  • Make some changes to your document, like highlighting, blackout, and other tools in the top toolbar.
  • Hit the Download button and download your all-set document into you local computer.
Get Form

Download the form

We Are Proud of Letting You Edit Abington School District List Serve In the Most Efficient Way

Discover More About Our Best PDF Editor for Abington School District List Serve

Get Form

Download the form

How to Edit Your Abington School District List Serve Online

If you need to sign a document, you may need to add text, fill in the date, and do other editing. CocoDoc makes it very easy to edit your form with just a few clicks. Let's see how to finish your work quickly.

  • Hit the Get Form button on this page.
  • You will go to our PDF editor web app.
  • When the editor appears, click the tool icon in the top toolbar to edit your form, like adding text box and crossing.
  • To add date, click the Date icon, hold and drag the generated date to the target place.
  • Change the default date by changing the default to another date in the box.
  • Click OK to save your edits and click the Download button for sending a copy.

How to Edit Text for Your Abington School District List Serve with Adobe DC on Windows

Adobe DC on Windows is a useful tool to edit your file on a PC. This is especially useful when you finish the job about file edit offline. So, let'get started.

  • Click the Adobe DC app on Windows.
  • Find and click the Edit PDF tool.
  • Click the Select a File button and select a file from you computer.
  • Click a text box to edit the text font, size, and other formats.
  • Select File > Save or File > Save As to confirm the edit to your Abington School District List Serve.

How to Edit Your Abington School District List Serve With Adobe Dc on Mac

  • Select a file on you computer and Open it with the Adobe DC for Mac.
  • Navigate to and click Edit PDF from the right position.
  • Edit your form as needed by selecting the tool from the top toolbar.
  • Click the Fill & Sign tool and select the Sign icon in the top toolbar to customize your signature in different ways.
  • Select File > Save to save the changed file.

How to Edit your Abington School District List Serve from G Suite with CocoDoc

Like using G Suite for your work to complete a form? You can edit your form in Google Drive with CocoDoc, so you can fill out your PDF without Leaving The Platform.

  • Go to Google Workspace Marketplace, search and install CocoDoc for Google Drive add-on.
  • Go to the Drive, find and right click the form and select Open With.
  • Select the CocoDoc PDF option, and allow your Google account to integrate into CocoDoc in the popup windows.
  • Choose the PDF Editor option to open the CocoDoc PDF editor.
  • Click the tool in the top toolbar to edit your Abington School District List Serve on the needed position, like signing and adding text.
  • Click the Download button to save your form.

PDF Editor FAQ

Why is the Bible not taught in history class? Is it because it’s not historical?

It actually used to be. It is still on the list of approved material in the school system to be able to be used in class as a historical document. However I am assuming because of the possible backlash from parents it is not. The Ten Commandments used to be posted, however a parent sued and in the Stone v. Graham, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on November 17, 1980, ruled (5–4) that a Kentucky statute requiring school officials to post a copy of the Ten Commandments (purchased with private contributions) on a wall in every public classroom violated the First Amendment’s establishment clause, which is commonly interpreted as a separation of church and state.Part of the same ruling stated as part the Majority: "This is not a case in which the Ten Commandments are integrated into the school curriculum, where the Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, or the like. [See Abington School District v. Schempp.] Posting of religious texts on the wall serves no such educational function. If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments. However desirable this might be as a matter of private devotion, it is not a permissible state objective .

What percentage of cases heard by the Supreme Court involve First Amendment issues? I'm looking for a rough number that could fairly accurately describe the focus on the Court since the 1940s or so.

I do not know what percentage the First Amendment issues account for. I imagine that there are cases that involve First Amendment issues but also other issues that are not cataloged as First Amendment. According to Wikipedia, the following are First Amendment cases, arranged by topic (about 5 of them are pre 1940, two are 1939 and one from 1936, which I think counts as “or so”):The establishment of religion[edit]Standing to sue[edit]Flast v. Cohen (1968)Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church & State (1982)Tax exemption to religious institutions[edit]Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York (1970)Bob Jones University v. United States (1983)Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock (1989)Legislative chaplains[edit]Marsh v. Chambers (1984)Town of Greece v. Galloway (2014)Government-sponsored religious displays[edit]Lynch v. Donnelly (1984)Board of Trustees of Scarsdale v. McCreary (1985)County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1989)McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (2005)Van Orden v. Perry (2005)Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (2009)Religion in public education[edit]McCollum v. Board of Education (1948)Zorach v. Clauson (1952)Engel v. Vitale (1962)Abington School District v. Schempp (1963)Epperson v. Arkansas (1968)Stone v. Graham (1980)Rosenberger v. University of Virginia (1995)Agostini v. Felton (1997)Mitchell v. Helms (2000)Prayer in public schools[edit]Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)Lee v. Weisman (1992)Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe (2000)Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow (2004)Teaching of creationism in public schools[edit]Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)Governmental aid to church-related schools[edit]Cochran v. Louisiana State Board of Education (1930)Everson v. Board of Education (1947)Abington School District v. Schempp (1963)Board of Education v. Allen (1968)Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)Tilton v. Richardson (1971)Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v. Nyquist (1973)Meek v. Pittenger (1975)Roemer v. Board of Public Works of Maryland (1976)Wolman v. Walter (1977)Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v. Regan (1980)Mueller v. Allen (1983)Aguilar v. Felton (1985)Grand Rapids School District v. Ball (1985)Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District (1993)Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn (2011)Blue laws[edit]Main article: Blue laws in the United StatesMcGowan v. Maryland (1961)Braunfeld v. Brown (1961)Gallagher v. Crown Kosher Super Market of Mass., Inc. (1961)Thornton v. Caldor (1985)Religious institution functioning as a government agency[edit]Larkin v. Grendel’s Den (1982)Bowen v. Kendrick (1988)Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School v. Grumet (1994)Unequal government treatment of religious groups[edit]Larson v. Valente (1982)The free exercise of religion[edit]Polygamy[edit]Main article: List of polygamy court casesReynolds v. United States (1878)Davis v. Beason (1890)Religion and the right to work[edit]Sherbert v. Verner (1963)Trans World Airlines v. Hardison (1977)Ohio Civil Rights Commission v. Dayton Christian Schools (1986)Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos (1987)Employment Division v. Smith (1990)Religious tests for public service or benefits[edit]Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)Torcaso v. Watkins (1961)McDaniel v. Paty (1978)Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division (1981)Goldman v. Weinberger (1986)Bowen v. Roy (1986)Free exercise and free speech[edit]R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)Good News Club v. Milford Central School (2001)Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal (2006)Free exercise and public education[edit]Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)Widmar v. Vincent (1981)Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools v. Mergens (1990)Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District (1993)Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia (1995)Free Exercise and public property[edit]Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette (1995)Solicitation by religious groups[edit]Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940)Cox v. New Hampshire (1941)Jones v. City of Opelika (I) (1942)Marsh v. Alabama (1942)Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943)Jones v. City of Opelika (II) (1943)West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)Prince v. Massachusetts (1944)Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness (1981)Free exercise and eminent domain[edit]Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association (1988)City of Boerne v. Flores (1997)Ritual sacrifice of animals[edit]Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993)Government intervention in church controversies[edit]United States v. Ballard (1944)Kedroff v. Saint Nicholas Cathedral (1952)Presbyterian Church v. Hull Church (1969)Jones v. Wolf (1979)Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2012)Freedom of speech[edit]Freedom of speech portalSedition and imminent danger[edit]Debs v. United States (1919)Schenck v. United States (1919)Abrams v. United States (1919)Gitlow v. New York (1925)Whitney v. California (1927)Dennis v. United States (1951)Communist Party v. Subversive Activities Control Board (1955)Yates v. United States (1957)Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)False speech[edit]United States v. Alvarez (2012)Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus (2014)Fighting words and the heckler's veto[edit]Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)Terminiello v. Chicago (1949)Feiner v. New York (1951)National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)Snyder v. Phelps (2011)Freedom of assembly and public forums[edit]Hague v. CIO (1939)Schneider v. New Jersey (1939)Martin v. Struthers (1943)NAACP v. Alabama (1958)Edwards v. South Carolina (1963)Cox v. Louisiana (1965)Brown v. Louisiana (1966)Adderley v. Florida (1966)Carroll v. Princess Anne (1968)Coates v. Cincinnati (1971)Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe (1971)Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad (1975)Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins (1980)Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2010)Time, place and manner[edit]Cases concerning restrictions on the time, place, and manner of speechChicago Police Dept. v. Mosley (1972)Grayned v. City of Rockford (1972)Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989)Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York (1997)Hill v. Colorado (2000)McCullen v. Coakley (2014)Symbolic speech[edit]United States v. O'Brien (1968)Cohen v. California (1971)Texas v. Johnson (1989)United States v. Eichman (1990)City of Erie v. Pap's A.M. (2000)Virginia v. Black (2003)Compelled speech[edit]Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940)West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)Wooley v. Maynard (1977)Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society (2013)Compelled subsidy for speech of others[edit]Cases that consider the First Amendment implications of payments mandated by the state going to use in part for speech by third partiesAbood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977)Communications Workers of America v. Beck (1978)Chicago Local Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986)Keller v. State Bar of California (1990)Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Ass'n (1991)Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliott Inc. (1997)Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth (2000)United States v. United Foods, Inc. (2001)Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association (2005)Davenport v. Washington Education Association (2007)Locke v. Karass (2008)Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 (2012)Harris v. Quinn (2014)Friedrichs v. California Teachers Ass'n (2016)Janus v. AFSCME (2018)Loyalty oaths and affirmations[edit]American Communications Association v. Douds (1950)Garner v. Board of Public Works, (1951)Adler v. Board of Ed. of City of New York, (1952)Wieman v. Updegraff, (1952)Speiser v. Randall, (1958)Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction, (1961)Keyishian v. Board of Regents, (1965)Communist Party of Indiana v. Whitcomb, (1974)School speech[edit]Speech by students in public secondary schools (for cases involving teachers' free-speech rights, see Public employees, below).Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)Board of Education v. Pico (1982)Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser (1986)Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)Poling v. Murphy(1989)Guiles v. Marineau (2006)Morse v. Frederick (2007)Obscenity[edit]Generally[edit]Cases concerned with the definition of obscenity and whether a particular work or type of material is obscene.Roth v. United States (1957)Alberts v. California, (1957)One, Inc. v. Olesen, (1958)MANual Enterprises v. Day, (1962)Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)Memoirs v. Massachusetts, (1966)Kois v. Wisconsin (1972)Miller v. California (1973)Jenkins v. Georgia (1974)New York v. Ferber (1982)Osborne v. Ohio (1990)United States v. Stevens (2010)As criminal offense[edit]Appeals of criminal convictions for possessing, selling or distributing obscenity that focused on that issueRosen v. United States (1896)Butler v. Michigan (1957)Smith v. California, (1959)Ginzburg v. United States, (1966)Mishkin v. New York, (1966)Redrup v. New York (1967)Ginsberg v. New York (1968)Stanley v. Georgia (1969)Blount v. Rizzi (1971)United States v. Reidel (1971)Heller v. New York (1973)United States v. Orito (1973)Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville (1975)United States v. X-Citement Video (1994)Search, seizure and forfeiture[edit]Cases involving the search and seizure of allegedly obscene materialMarcus v. Search Warrant, (1961)Quantity of Books v. Kansas (1964)Lee Art Theatre, Inc. v. Virginia (1968)United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs (1971)United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Film (1973)Roaden v. Kentucky (1973)Lo-Ji Sales, Inc., v. New York (1979)Maryland v. Macon (1985)New York v. P.J. Video, Inc. (1986)Civil and administrative regulation[edit]Cases dealing with civil and administrative regulatory procedures aimed at suppressing or restricting obscenity, such as film-licensing boards or zoning regulations.Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio (1915)Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson (1952)Kingsley Books, Inc. v. Brown (1957)Kingsley Int'l Pictures Corp. v. Regents of Univ. of N. Y. (1959)Times Film Corp. v. Chicago (1961)Bantam Books v. Sullivan (1963)Freedman v. Maryland (1965)Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton (1973)Young v. American Mini Theatres (1976)Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc. (1986)United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group (2000)Internet[edit]Cases involving laws meant to restrict obscenity onlineReno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997)Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union (2002)Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002)Government-funded speech[edit]Cases about restrictions on speech by third parties funded by the government.Rust v. Sullivan (1991)Legal Services Corp. v. Velazquez (2001)Speech by public employees[edit]Pickering v. Board of Education (1968)Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972)Perry v. Sindermann (1972)Madison School District v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (1976)Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle (1977)Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District (1979)Snepp v. United States (1980)Connick v. Myers (1983)Rankin v. McPherson (1987)Waters v. Churchill (1994)United States v. National Treasury Employees Union (1995)Board of Commissioners, Wabaunsee County v. Umbehr, (1996)San Diego v. Roe (2004)Garcetti v. Ceballos (2007)Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri (2011)Lane v. Franks (2014)Heffernan v. City of Paterson (2016)Political activity and Hatch Act of 1939[edit]Ex parte Curtis (1882)United Public Workers v. Mitchell (1947)United States Civil Service Commission v. National Association of Letter Carriers (1973)Broadrick v. Oklahoma (1973)Elrod v. Burns (1976)Branti v. Finkel (1979)Commercial speech[edit]Valentine v. Chrestensen (1942)Rowan v. U.S. Post Office Dept. (1970)Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations (1973)Lehman v. Shaker Heights (1974)Bigelow v. Commonwealth of Virginia (1974)Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976)Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1977)Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Willingboro (1977)Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn. (1978)Friedman v. Rogers (1979)Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission (1980)Consol. Edison Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n (1980)Hoffman Estates v. The Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. (1982)Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. (1983)Edenfield v. Fane (1993)44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island (1996)Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman (2017)Official retaliation[edit]Cases where it has been alleged government officials retaliated for protected speechLozman v. City of Riviera Beach (2018)Nieves v. Bartlett (2019)Freedom of the press[edit]Prior restraints and censorship[edit]Near v. Minnesota (1931)Lovell v. City of Griffin (1938)Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1974)Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart (1976)Houchins v. KQED, Inc. (1978)Tory v. Cochran (2005)Privacy[edit]Time, Inc. v. Hill (1967)Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn (1975)Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia (1980)[1][2]Florida Star v. B. J. F. (1989)Wilson v. Layne (1999)Taxation and privileges[edit]Grosjean v. American Press Co. (1936)Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)Minneapolis Star Tribune Company v. Commissioner (1983)Defamation[edit]Beauharnais v. Illinois (1952)New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)Garrison v. Louisiana (1964)Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts (1967)Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974)Time, Inc. v. Firestone (1976)Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc. (1981)Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. (1985)McDonald v. Smith (1985)Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988)Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. (1990)Hoeper v. Air Wisconsin (2014)Broadcast media[edit]Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC (1968)CBS v. Democratic National Committee (1973)FCC v. League of Women Voters of California (1984)FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1989)Turner Broadcasting v. FCC (1995)Government speech[edit]Cases pertaining to whether or not extending protections to speech constitutes government endorsement of speech.Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans (2015)Matal v. Tam (2017)Freedom of association[edit]Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath (1951)Watkins v. United States (1957)Sweezy v. New Hampshire (1957)NAACP v. Alabama (1958)Shelton v. Tucker (1960)Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Committee (1963)Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund (1975)Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977)In re Primus (1978)Roberts v. United States Jaycees (1984)Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston (1995)Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000)Right to petition[edit]United States v. Cruikshank (1876)Thomas v. Collins (1945)Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. (1961)NAACP v. Button (1963)Edwards v. South Carolina (1963)United Mine Workers v. Pennington (1965)Cox v. Louisiana (1965)California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited (1972)Smith v. Arkansas State Highway Employees (1979)McDonald v. Smith (1985)Meyer v. Grant (1988)Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation (1999)BE and K Construction Co. V. National Labor Relations Board (2002)Doe v. Reed (2010)Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri (2011)

People Like Us

Incredibly easy and flexible. Has very strong integrations and advanced functionality that helps us be more productive. Company has amazing support and makes it easy for even the most novice users

Justin Miller