1968: The Supreme Court rules that a law can forbid symbolic speech in the form of destroying draft cards. 1969: The Supreme Court rules that a law cannot forbid speech that supports violence unless it is intended to immediately cause individuals to break the law. 1989: The Supreme Court rules that burning an American flag as symbolic speech is protected. What do the events in this timeline suggest about how the Supreme Court has interpreted free speech over time?  A. The Court has expanded its definition of what qualifies as speech.  B. The Court has moved toward fewer restrictions on free speech.  C. The Court has moved away from ruling on symbolic speech.  D. The Court has consistently allowed laws to limit free speech.

-Topic: Speech

-Scenario: O'Brien burns draft card in front of Boston courthouse in protest of Vietnam war --> convicted under federal law that prohibits destruction of a draft card

-Decision/Importance: Ruled that this symbolic speech was not protected under 1st amendment; the law under which O'Brien was convicted was meant to further a specific govt interest

Explanation:

yes, obviously. that violates r@pe and p*dophilia laws, which are some pretty serious laws if you ask me.

in order to appeal you must be able to show why the mark or classification you are appealing against is unfair, or does not represent your true academic ability. you believe your degree classification was not calculated correctly. a procedural problem over the way an exam or assessment was conducted or marked.