Adefendant charged with driving while intoxicated pleaded not guilty and insisted on a trial. right before the trial began, he fired his attorney and decided to defend himself. at one point during opening arguments, the defendant began to act like a cat, meowing and chasing an imaginary squirrel out of the courtroom. if no one else raises the issue of the defendant's competency to stand trial, what is the responsibility of the trial judge here? a) the trial judge has no responsibility, because the defendant decided to defend himself. b) the trial judge has no responsibility, because she cannot decide whether the defendant is competent to stand trial. c) the trial judge must raise the issue of competency, because the defendant is representinghimself. d) the trial judge must raise the issue of competency, because the constitution obligates her to do.

Father arthur terminiello, in an auditorium in chicago, delivered a vitriolic speech in which he criticized various political and racial groups and viciously condemned the protesting crowd that had gathered outside the auditorium. policemen assigned to the event were unable to prevent several disturbances by the "angry and turbulent" crowd. the police arrested terminiello for "breach of the peace." he was then tried and convicted for his central role in inciting a riot. in terminiello v. chicago (1949), the court found the ordinance unconstitutionally infringed on first amendment rights. noting that "[t]he vitality of civil and political institutions in our society depends on free discussion," the court held that speech could be restricted only in the event that it was "likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest." source: oyez, terminiello v. chicago (1949) identify a constitutional provision that is common to both terminiello v. chicago (1949) and schenck v. united states (1919). based on the constitutional clause identified in part a, explain why the facts of terminiello v. chicago led to a different holding than the holding in schenck v. united states. describe an action that members of the public who disagree with the holding in terminiello v. chicago could take to limit its impact.