Yelling fire in a movie theater by a person is protected free speech

[Prosper]

But is repeating “fire” when you know it is false protected under free speech? Is social media given a pass for the sake of economic gain? Just like people in power are held to a higher standard (supposedly) does social media imply validity certification?

[Nature Man]

1. I think it's the other way around.

Dangerous speech is NOT protected.

[we can do it]

2. No it is not.

[fleur-de-lisa]

3. Umm, no it's not.

[lame54]

9. Right - that is the classic example

[Downtown Hound]

4. Go back and reread your case law. n/t

[bullimiami]

5. It's a crime to cough or spit on items at a grocery. Yet,

It’s not a crime to cough or spit o a person??

[quaint]

6. Might be surprised at what and why Justice Holmes wrote

The legendary Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who was writing in 1919 and we have got to look at what he actually said rather than the way we misquote it.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.: “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.”

from LegalTalkNetwork

[Dial H For Hero]

10. Thank you!

Every time I see someone say "You can't yell fire in a crowed theater" I always want to correct them.

[Yeehah]

11. I think you need to read that again.

Thanks for your attention to this matter.

[Hortensis]

14. :) As in the OP, it depends on whether the claim is true or false.

And in reading, whether we understand what meaning was intended.

[Volaris]

12. That's right. The theatre had better damn well BE ON FIRE.

[quaint]

15. Obviously, I'm confused.

I understood the opinion was to stifle speech during war.

[Prosper]

16. The point is there is no law against speaking, there is law about what you speak.

No restriction against speech. There are places where silence is imposed. Small point. When Trump lies I think anybody repeating it without qualification is culpable.

[secondwind]

7. It's not protected at all. It's totally illegal

[VOX]

8. EVERY constitutional right has limitations; falsely yelling "Fire!" in a theater is one.

-Firing off a live round into the air from a weapon in a city is another.
-Your freedom to roam stops at private property lines.
-Assembling a crowd requires numerous permits from local authorities and law enforcement.

Constitutional rights go just so far— telling your boss to go fuck himself in a staff meeting wouldn’t get you jailed, but it would get you fired.

As far as the unflushable toilet of social media, so long as there are no physical threats, or videos depicting illegal acts, or harassment, etc., it’s up to the individual site operator regarding rules of behavior.

[Volaris]

13. Yes, because those websites are considered private property, and while

You're invited to be there, you have to agree to the terms of service. It's not different than being in a local bar. If you get obnoxious and start a fight, they have the right to throw you out. Doesnt mean they're GONNA call the cops n have you arrested.

The difference is that the Terms are posted up front. You have to sign the EULA before you're allowed in.

Conservatives think the web, and especially social media is a protected, PUBLIC SPACE, when nothing could be farther from the truth.

They think this because they're idiots and that they're being oh so victimized because they're actually not allowed to be hateful dicks online.