Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
Fri May 25, 2018, 12:45 PM May 2018

Required Reading: Freedom of Speech

In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment and has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech. The First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech, which is applicable to state and local governments under the incorporation doctrine,[1] only prevents government restrictions on speech, not restrictions imposed by private individuals or businesses unless they are acting on behalf of the government.[2] However, laws may restrict the ability of private businesses and individuals from restricting the speech of others, such as employment laws that restrict employers' ability to prevent employees from disclosing their salary with coworkers or attempting to organize a labor union.

The First Amendment's freedom of speech right not only proscribes most government restrictions on the content of speech and ability to speak, but also protects the right to receive information,[3] prohibits most government restrictions or burdens that discriminate between speakers,[4] restricts the tort liability of individuals for certain speech,[5] and prevents the government from requiring individuals and corporations to speak or finance certain types of speech with which they don't agree.[6][7][8]

Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment include obscenity (as determined by the Miller test), fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct,[9] speech that incites imminent lawless action, and regulation of commercial speech such as advertising.[10][11] Within these limited areas, other limitations on free speech balance rights to free speech and other rights, such as rights for authors over their works (copyright), protection from imminent or potential violence against particular persons, restrictions on the use of untruths to harm others (slander), and communications while a person is in prison. When a speech restriction is challenged in court, it is presumed invalid and the government bears the burden of convincing the court that the restriction is constitutional.[12]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States

What Does Free Speech Mean?

Among other cherished values, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech. The U.S. Supreme Court often has struggled to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. The following are examples of speech, both direct (words) and symbolic (actions), that the Court has decided are either entitled to First Amendment protections, or not.

“Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech.”

Freedom of speech includes the right:

Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag).
West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).

Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”).
Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).

To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).

To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns.
Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976).

To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions).
Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977).

To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest).
Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990).

Freedom of speech does not include the right:

To incite actions that would harm others (e.g., “[S]hout[ing] ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”).
Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919).

To make or distribute obscene materials.
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).

To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).

To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).

Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).

Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).

http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Required Reading: Freedom of Speech (Original Post) NCTraveler May 2018 OP
In America, also includeds right to broadcast hate and lies and make Fred Sanders May 2018 #1
Correct. NCTraveler May 2018 #2
Still waiting angrychair May 2018 #3
This is interesting. NCTraveler May 2018 #4

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
1. In America, also includeds right to broadcast hate and lies and make
Fri May 25, 2018, 12:53 PM
May 2018

false and inflammatory hateful speech against minorities, the ultimate white privilege...USA, USA, USA!

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
2. Correct.
Fri May 25, 2018, 12:55 PM
May 2018

In most of those instances the government won't come down on the person or entity lying or broadcasting hate.

angrychair

(8,699 posts)
3. Still waiting
Fri May 25, 2018, 01:05 PM
May 2018

That by implying “I do not know what freedom of speech is” you have premised at least some level of expertise in the subject otherwise it makes your claim baseless as a fact and solely an opinion. Because in order to make such a conjecture you would have to know the subject well enough to establish a considered position of judgment on who is and is not knowledgeable on freedom of speech.

With such an unequivocal statement you establish a position as a subject matter expert and therefore I would fully expect you to have the ability to explain how you came to a determination that I “do not know what freedom of speech is”.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Required Reading: Freedom...