Talk:Freedom of association

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Human rights, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the Project page, where you can join the Project and contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the assessment scale.

yeah, i see your point. i think the confusion may have a good deal to do with the Court's muddled jurisprudence in this regard. i adapted the the two "freedoms of association" from roberts v. us jaycees (468 us 609):

"our decisions have referred to constitutionally protected freedom of association in two distinc senses...choices to enter into and maintain human relationships must be secured against undue intrusion by the state...[and] a right to associate for the purpose of engaging in those activities protected by the first amendment..."

After reading the article for the first time i found myself confused with regard to the two cases where the right to Freedom Of Association may be invoked. After further thought, it occurred to me that the source of my confusion was the fact that the two points were not clearly defined and made to appear indistinct. From what i understand, freedom of association covers two issues:

1)Freedom to form intimate relationships with whomever one chooses without intrusion by the state.

2)Freedom to associate for the purpose of protecting civil liberties guaranteed in the constitution.

Now if you include in point 1: Because the role of these relationships (while not explicit in the Constitution's text, see right to privacy) is central to SAFEGUARDING individual freedoms central to the Constitution, they may receive protection from undue intrusion by the State.

While point 2 states:

there is a constitutional freedom to associate as a means of PRESERVING other individual liberties.

From what i understand, in this context safeguarding and preserving are synonymous and the two points would be indistinct making the need for two points redundant.

[edit] Freedom: assembly vs. association

I am not a lawyer, and I am suspicious whether Freedom of assembly and Freedom of association are one and the same thing. If they are, then the articles must be merged. If they are not, the distinction must be clarified somewhere for ignoramuses like me. Mikkalai 19:38, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

An informal sense of the difference would be assembly is active organization whereas association involves discontinuing the active participation. I may choose to disassociate with an individual, but it doesn't follow that I want to form some other concern or re-associate with someone else or a group of someone else's. Assembly is a union, Association is just quitting. You could argue though, that assembly is a subset of association. 75.92.15.232 (talk)

[edit] US As Special and Important Case

Jagz, please do not destroy the work noting the particular case of the US's civil rights laws as founded upon the insitution of slavery. It is clear that the influential position of the US during the 1960s and beyod had a profound impact on the geopolitics of immigration and integration. Jim Bowery 23:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)