Political Ideologies - Essay Example

Ideals such as ethnic diveristy, equal opportunity and accurate representation are great ideals but it cannot be imposed that will impede free speech which is inherent in the artistic expression of film making. Film making just like any art form, are not subjected to any absolute prescription of how it should be done but depends on the film maker’s interpretation of the universe and the artistic manner it is conveyed. ACE’s advocacy to impose ethic diversity, equal opportunity, and accurate representation of a movie is a casting decision with expressive element because such advocacy also entails the expression of a particular political persuasion.

Such political persuasion (ethnic diversity, equal opportunity and accuracy of representation) will not take any material form if not explicitly expressed and thus the validity of such expressive element should be subjected to the O’Brien and Cohen tests. To pass the O’Brien test, ACE must satisfy all four regulations which are; 1. The law must be within the constitutional power of government.  2. The law must further important or substantial government interest.  3. The interest must be unrelated to the suppressing expressions.  4. Any incidental limit on expression is no greater than necessary. . quality and diversity are one of many the bedrocks of this country.

  Indeed the political persuasion or advocacy of ACE is important or substantial to government interest. ACE however did not meet the criteria in the third element of O’Brien test that stipulates that such expressive element must be unrelated to the suppressing expressions in the same manner that “the constitutional power of Congress to raise and support armies and to make all laws necessary and proper to that end is broad and sweeping” (UNITED STATES v. O'BRIEN, 1968) has no relation with the suppression of speech.

In Ace’s case, it is DIRECTLY RELATED to suppressing another’s expression which is that of Donalds interpretation of rendering a particular movie. ACE, in pushing for its advocacy for equality, diversity and accurate representation of film albeit laudable, trampled on another right to free speech thus directly relates to suppression of another’s right to free speech. It follows that the exercise of ACE’s advocacy directly suppress another’s right to artistic expression and freedom of speech and places not only an incidental limit on expression that is not only greater than necessary but unnecessary in the first place because no attempt should be made to abridge artistic vision.

Unlike in O’Brien case where the Supreme Court ruled that “we perceive no alternative means that would more precisely and narrowly assure the continuing availability of issued Selective Service certificates than a law which prohibits their wilful mutilation or destruction” (United States vs. O’Brien, 1968) ACE has other avenues where the advocacy of ethnic diversity and equality is appropriate. Thus, ACE may have passed the first two elements of the O’Brien test but grossly failed on the