Practice question
A television review board refuses a religious program solely because its doctrine criticizes another religion. The record establishes no clear and present danger of a substantive evil; the board equates theological disagreement with prohibited offensiveness. The producer argues that the board both lacks all jurisdiction and acted unlawfully. Which is best under Iglesia ni Cristo?
- Both arguments must always succeed
- Review jurisdiction makes every ban lawful
- The board may have review authority, yet the stated basis for suppression fails constitutional scrutiny
- Religious disagreements are necessarily obscenity
- All criticism of a majority faith is unprotected
Legal references
- Iglesia ni Cristo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119673, July 26, 1996, main opinion: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1996/jul1996/gr_119673_1996.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.