Some interesting First amendment cases based on celebrities

The Case revolving George Carlin's "filthy words" routine from 1973.

FCC v. Pacifica Foundations, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)
Justia  Findlaw  CaseBriefs

The case about the "wardrobe malfunction" Janet Jackson had at her Super Bowl Halftime Performance
FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. (2012)


 Supreme Court 


The Case about Napster, the music sharing company, that the band Metallica was involved with.
Justia  CaseText

Michael H. v. Gerald D. afterwards

Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110 (1989)
I have now read this case twice, once in Family Law and once in Constitutional Law.  Justia has the opinion that can be read here for free.  https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/491/110/

The case amazes me, mainly because there is DNA genetic evidence that the husband is not the girl's biological father.  In each class discussion the question of what would be different if this had been a divorced mother whose daughter had visitation to her dad compared to what happened here?
In 1989 maybe the definition of family was different than it is now, but divorce and shared custody was occurring at this time.

In any case, the aftermath is what usually interests me.
While I think I found the mother and who the husband and daughter are, it is not appropriate to post their photos or information here.  At the time this happened the girl was a child and her privacy should be respected.
However, what impresses me was that Michael kept fighting to see his daughter, and the court continued to rule against him. (http://articles.latimes.com/1992-06-21/magazine/tm-1114_1_supreme-court)

Johnson v. California = strict scrutiny - after remand

In Constitutional Law you may read a case about the California prison system and an unwritten policy that upon entering a new facility prisoners were racially segregated for up to 60 days while backgrounds were checked.  California claimed it was to try and reduce racially based gangs from fighting. This would seem like a compelling state interest based on the historic background with California Prisons and gang violence (http://www.businessinsider.com/most-dangerous-prison-gangs-in-the-us-2014-2).

However the Supreme Court determined that no matter what when there is racial classifications the strict scrutiny test must be used.
Supreme Court opinion can be found https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/541/428/
and the definition of strict scrutiny you can visit http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/strict_scrutiny

What happened after Johnson v. California was reserved and remanded was slightly harder to find out.  On page 294 of the following article Racial Desegregation in Prisons from The Prison Journal it is stated that on remand the matter was settled through mediation and the California Prison System policy would change.