|
Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. Criticism of the government and advocation of unpopular ideas that people may find distasteful or against public policy, such as racism, are generally permitted. There are exceptions to the general protection of speech, however, including the Miller test for obscenity, child pornography laws, and regulation of commercial speech such as advertising. Other limitations on free speech often balance rights to free speech and other rights, such as property rights for authors and inventors (copyright), interests in fair political campaigns (Campaign finance laws), protection from imminent or potential violence against particular persons (restrictions on Hate speech or fighting words), or the use of untruths to harm others (slander). Distinctions are also often made between speech and other acts, such as flag desecration, which may have symbolic significance. Image File history File links Mergefrom. ...
The US Bill of Rights guarantees the rights of citizens to speak and publish freely. ...
This article is about the general concept. ...
The first ten Amendments to the U.S. Constitution make up the Bill of Rights. ...
Wikisource has original text related to this article: The United States Constitution The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. ...
Manifestations Slavery Racial profiling Lynching Hate speech Hate crime Genocide (examples) Ethnocide Ethnic cleansing Pogrom Race war Religious persecution Blood libel Paternalism Police brutality Movements Policies Discriminatory Race / Religion / Sex segregation Apartheid Redlining Internment Ethnocracy Anti-discriminatory Emancipation Civil rights Desegregation Integration Equal opportunity Counter-discriminatory Affirmative action Racial quota...
The Miller test is the United States Supreme Courts test for determining whether speech or expression can be labeled obscene, in which case it is not protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and can be prohibited. ...
Obscenity in Latin obscenus, meaning foul, repulsive, detestable, (possibly derived from ob caenum, literally from filth). The term is most often used in a legal context to describe expressions (words, images, actions) that offend the prevalent sexual morality of the time. ...
// Advert redirects here. ...
Not to be confused with copywriting. ...
Campaign finance in the United States is the financing of electoral campaigns at the federal, state, and local levels. ...
Manifestations Slavery Racial profiling Lynching Hate speech Hate crime Genocide (examples) Ethnocide Ethnic cleansing Pogrom Race war Religious persecution Gay bashing Blood libel Paternalism Police brutality Movements Policies Discriminatory Race / Religion / Sex segregation Apartheid Redlining Internment Anti-discriminatory Emancipation Civil rights Desegregation Integration Equal opportunity Counter-discriminatory Affirmative action Racial...
The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as granted in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution In its 9-0 decision, Chaplinsky v. ...
In English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort or delict of making a false statement of fact that injures someones reputation. ...
Burning the Flag of the United States Flag desecration is a blanket term applied to various acts that intentionally deface a flag, most often a national flag (though other flags can be defaced as well). ...
Historical background
England During colonial times, English speech regulations were rather restrictive. An English seditious libel law made criticizing the government a crime. According to the of the Star Chamber, the King was above public criticism and statements critical of the government were forbidden. Chief Justice Holt, writing in 1704, explained the apparent need for the prohibition of seditious libel, "[i]f people should not be called to account for possessing the people with an ill opinion of the government, no government can subsist. For it is very necessary for all governments that the people should have a good opinion of it." The objective truth of a statement in violation of the seditious libel law was not a defense. This article is about the colonial history of the United States. ...
For other uses, see England (disambiguation). ...
Sedition refers to a legal designation of non-overt conduct that is deemed by a legal authority as being acts of treason, and hence deserving of legal punishment. ...
The Star Chamber (Latin Camera stellata) was an English court of law at the royal Palace of Westminster that sat between 1487 and 1641, when the court itself was abolished. ...
Until 1694, England had an elaborate system of licensing. No publication was allowed without the accompaniment of a government-granted license. Events February 6 - The colony Quilombo dos Palmares is destroyed. ...
Colonies The hamadis originally had different views on the protection of free speech. During English colonialism in America, there were fewer prosecutions for seditious libel than England, but other controls over dissident speech existed. Professor Levy said that each community "tended to be a tight little island clutching its own respective orthodoxy and . . . eager to banish or extralegally punish unwelcome dissidents."[citation needed]
The most stringent controls on speech in the colonial period were controls that outlawed or otherwise censored speech that was considered blasphemous in a religious sense. A 1646 Massachusetts law, for example, punished persons who denied the immortality of the soul. In 1612, a Virginia governor declared the death penalty for a person that denied the Trinity under Virginia's Laws Divine, Moral and Martial, which also outlawed blasphemy, speaking badly of ministers and royalty, and "disgraceful words."[1] For the black metal band, see Blasphemy (band). ...
1646 (MDCXLVI) was a common year starting on Monday (see link for calendar) of the Gregorian calendar (or a common year starting on Thursday of the 10-day slower Julian calendar). ...
Events January 20 - Mathias becomes Holy Roman Emperor. ...
This article is about the U.S. state. ...
The trial of John Peter Zenger in 1735 was a seditious libel prosecution for Zenger's publication of criticisms of the Governor of New York. Andrew Hamilton represented Zenger and argued that truth should be a defense to the crime of seditious libel, but the court rejected this argument. Hamilton persuaded the jury, however, to disregard the law and to acquit Zenger. The case is considered a victory for freedom of speech as well as a prime example jury nullification. The case marked the beginning of a trend of greater acceptance and tolerance of free speech. John Peter Zenger (October 26, 1697 – July 28, 1746) was a German-born American printer, publisher, editor and journalist in New York City. ...
This page is about a famous lawyer; see Andrew Hamilton (disambiguation) for other meanings. ...
Jury nullification refers to a rendering of a not guilty verdict by a trial jury, disagreeing with the instructions by the judge concerning what is the law, or whether such law is applicable to the case, taking into account all of the evidence presented. ...
The First Amendment In the 1780s after the American Revolutionary War, debate over the adoption of a new Constitution resulted in a division between Federalists, such as Alexander Hamilton who favored a strong federal government, and Anti-Federalists, such as Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry who favored a weaker federal government. During and after the Constitution ratification process, Anti-Federalists and state legislatures expressed concern that the new Constitution placed too much emphasis on the power of the federal government. The drafting and eventual adoption of the Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment, was, in large part, a result of these concerns, as the Bill of Rights limited the power of the federal government. This article is about military actions only. ...
This article or section does not cite its references or sources. ...
Alexander Hamilton (November 20, 1755 or 1757 - July 12, 1804) was the first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, lawyer, Founding Father, American politician, leading statesman, political economist,] financier, and political theorist. ...
Anti-Federalism was the name given to two distinct counter-movements in the late 18th Century American politics: The first Anti-Federalist movement formed in reaction to the Federalist movement of the 1780s. ...
Thomas Jefferson (13 April 1743 N.S.–4 July 1826) was the third President of the United States (1801–09), the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776), and one of the most influential Founding Fathers for his promotion of the ideals of Republicanism in the United States. ...
Patrick Henry (May 29, 1736 – June 6, 1799) was a prominent figure in the American Revolution, known and remembered primarily for his stirring oratory. ...
The United States Bill of Rights consists of the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution. ...
“First Amendment†redirects here. ...
The First Amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791. The Amendment states:
- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Alien and Sedition Acts In 1798, Congress, which contained several of the drafters and ratifiers of the Bill of Rights at the time, adopted the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. The law prohibited the publication of "false, scandalous, and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame . . . or to bring them . . . into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them . . . hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States." Year 1798 (MDCCXCVIII) was a common year starting on Monday (link will display the full calendar) of the Gregorian calendar (or a common year starting on Friday of the 11-day slower Julian calendar). ...
The Alien and Sedition Acts were passed on July 14, 1798 under the administration of President John Adams. ...
The law did allow truth as a defense and required proof of malicious intent. The 1798 Act, however, made ascertainment of the intent of the framers in regard to the First Amendment somewhat difficult, as some of the members of Congress that supported the adoption of the First Amendment also voted to adopt the 1798 Act. The Federalists under President John Adams aggressively used the law against their rivals, the Democratic-Republicans. The Alien and Sedition Act was a major political issue in the 1800 election, and after he was elected President, Thomas Jefferson pardoned those who had been convicted under the Act. The Act expired and the Supreme Court never ruled on its constitutionality. The Federalist Party (or Federal Party) was an American political party in the period 1792 to 1816, with remnants lasting into the 1830s. ...
For other persons named John Adams, see John Adams (disambiguation). ...
The Democratic-Republican Party was founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1792. ...
Thomas Jefferson (13 April 1743 N.S.–4 July 1826) was the third President of the United States (1801–09), the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776), and one of the most influential Founding Fathers for his promotion of the ideals of Republicanism in the United States. ...
The Supreme Court of the United States (sometimes colloquially referred to by the acronym SCOTUS[1]) is the highest judicial body in the United States and leads the federal judiciary. ...
- See also: Espionage Act of 1917 and Sedition Act of 1918
In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Court declared "Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history." 376 U.S. 254, 276 (1964). The Espionage Act of 1917 was a United States federal law passed shortly after entering World War I, on June 15, 1917, which made it a crime for a person to convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States...
The Sedition Act of 1918 was an amendment to the Espionage Act of 1917 passed at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, who was concerned that dissent, in time of war, was a significant threat to morale. ...
Holding The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, protected a newspaper from being sued for libel in state court for making false defamatory statements about the official conduct of a public official, because the statements were not made with knowing or reckless disregard for the truth. ...
First Amendment interpretation Freedom of speech in the U.S. follows a graduated system, with different types of regulations subject to different levels of scrutiny in court challenges based on the First Amendment, often depending on the type of speech.
Types of Speech
Core Political Speech This is the most highly guarded form of speech because of its purely expressive nature and importance to a functional democracy. Most simply, core political speech is interactive communications about political ideas or issues that are not motivated by profit. Restrictions placed upon core political speech must weather strict scrutiny analysis or they will be struck down. Strict scrutiny is the highest standard of judicial review used by courts in the United States. ...
Commercial Speech Not wholly outside the protection of the First Amendment is speech motivated by profit. Such speech still has expressive value although it is being uttered in a marketplace ordinarily regulated by the state. Restrictions of commercial speech are subject to a four-element intermediate scrutiny. (Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission)
Types of restraints on speech
Time, place, or manner restrictions Time, place, or manner restrictions must meet the rational basis test (the lowest level of scrutiny) and are usually upheld, unless their requirements have an especially burdensome impact on speech. Note that any regulations that would force speakers to change how or what they say do not fall into this category (so the government cannot restrict one medium even if it leaves open another). Time, place, or manner restrictions must be: Rational basis rest, in U.S. constitutional law, is the lowest level of scrutiny applied by courts deciding constitutional issues through judicial review. ...
- Content neutral
- A significant governmental interest
- Narrowly tailored
- Leave open ample alternative channels of communication
Content-based restrictions Restrictions that require examining the content of speech to be applied must pass strict scrutiny.
Viewpoint-based restrictions Restrictions that apply to certain viewpoints but not others face the highest level of scrutiny, and are almost always overturned, unless they fall into one of the court's special exceptions.
Special exceptions Obscenity, defined by the Miller test by applying contemporary community standards, is one exception. It is speech to which all of the following apply: appeals to the prurient interest, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. (This is usually applied to more hard-core forms of pornography.) The Miller test is the United States Supreme Courts test for determining whether speech or expression can be labeled obscene, in which case it is not protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and can be prohibited. ...
Porn redirects here. ...
Fighting words are words or phrases that are likely to induce the listener to get in a fight. This previously applied to words like nigger, but with people getting less sensitive to words, this exception is little-used. The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as granted in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution In its 9-0 decision, Chaplinsky v. ...
The word nigger is a highly controversial term used in many English-speaking countries, including the United States, Canada, Britain, and Australia to refer to individuals with dark skin, especially those of African descent who previously were racially classified by the now outdated term Negro. ...
Speech that presents imminent lawless action (earlier, the legal test was for a clear and present danger, but this test has since been replaced by the imminent lawless action test) may also be restricted. The canonical example, enunciated by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, is falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater. The trend since Holmes's time has been to restrict the clear and present danger exception to apply to speech which is completely apolitical in content. Imminent lawless action is a term used in the United States Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. ...
For the book, see Clear and Present Danger. ...
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. ...
Shouting fire in a crowded theater is a misquote that refers to Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. ...
Restrictions on commercial speech, defined as speech mainly in furtherance of selling a product, is subject to a lower level of scrutiny than other speech, although recently the court has taken steps to bring it closer to parity with other speech. This is why the government can ban advertisements for cigarettes and false information on corporate prospectuses (which try to sell stock in a company). Commercial Speech is an expression related solely to the economic interest of the speaker and the speakers audience. ...
Prior restraint If the government tries to restrain speech before it is spoken, as opposed to punishing it afterwards, it must: clearly define what's illegal, cover the minimum speech necessary, make a quick decision, be backed up by a court, bear the burden of suing and proving the speech is illegal, and show that allowing the speech would "surely result in direct, immediate and irreparable damage to our Nation and its people" (New York Times Co. v. United States). U.S. courts have not permitted most prior restraints since the case of Near v. Minnesota in 1931. Holding In order to exercise prior restraint, the Government must show sufficient evidence that the publication would cause a “grave and irreparable†danger. ...
Holding A Minnesota law that imposed permanent injunctions against the publication of newspapers with malicious, scandalous, and defamatory content violated the First Amendment, as applied to the states by the Fourteenth. ...
Year 1931 (MCMXXXI) was a common year starting on Thursday (link will display full 1931 calendar) of the Gregorian calendar. ...
Censorship -
While personal freedom of speech is usually respected, freedom of press and mass publishing encounter some restrictions. Some of the recent issues include: The US Bill of Rights guarantees the rights of citizens to speak and publish freely. ...
Freedom of the press (or press freedom) is the guarantee by a government of free public speech often through a state constitution for its citizens, and associations of individuals extended to members of news gathering organizations, and their published reporting. ...
- United States military censoring blogs written by military personnel.
- The Federal Communications Commission censoring television and radio, citing obscenity, e.g., Howard Stern and Opie and Anthony (Though the FCC only has the power to regulate over the air broadcasts and not cable or satellite television or satellite radio).
See Also Roth v. United States It has been suggested that Online diary be merged into this article or section. ...
This article is a biography of Howard Stern as an individual; for information regarding his radio show see The Howard Stern Show. ...
Opie (Gregg Hughes, b. ...
Terrestrial television (also known as over-the-air or OTA) is the traditional method of television broadcast signal delivery, by radio waves transmitted through open space. ...
For other uses, see Cable (disambiguation). ...
// A satellite radio or subscription radio (SR) is a digital radio signal that is broadcast by a communications satellite, which covers a much wider geographical range than terrestrial radio signals. ...
Holding Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, but more strictly defines what is considered obscene. Court membership Chief Justice: Earl Warren Associate Justices: Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, William O. Douglas, Harold Hitz Burton, Tom C. Clark, John Marshall Harlan II, William J. Brennan, Charles Evans Whittaker Case opinions...
As of 2005, United States was ranked 44th of 167 countries in annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders. In the 2006 index the United States has fallen nine places and is now ranked 53rd of 168 countries. The US ranked 48th in 2007, however, moving back up 5 places. Doctrine Practices Concepts People Public outreach Organization Controversy Scientology is a body of beliefs and related practices created by American pulp fiction author L. Ron Hubbard in 1952 as an outgrowth of his earlier self-help system, Dianetics. ...
The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society. ...
Howard Keith Henson (b. ...
Reporters Without Borders, or RWB (French: Reporters sans frontières, Spanish: Reporteros Sin Fronteras, or RSF) is a French origin international non-governmental organization that advocates freedom of the press, founded by its current general-secretary, Robert Menard. ...
Reporters Without Borders, or RWB (French: Reporters sans frontières, Spanish: Reporteros Sin Fronteras, or RSF) is a French origin international non-governmental organization that advocates freedom of the press, founded by its current general-secretary, Robert Menard. ...
Freedom of expression
 A sign prompted by the Pruneyard case While freedom of expression by non-speech means is commonly thought to be protected under the First Amendment, the Supreme Court has only recently taken this view. As late as 1968 (United States v. O'Brien) the Supreme Court stated that regulating non-speech can justify limitations on speech. The Court carried this distinction between speech and expression through the early part of the 1980s (Clark v. CCNV (1984)). It was not until the flag-burning cases of 1989 (Texas v. Johnson) and 1990 (United States v. Eichman), that the Supreme Court accepted that non-speech means applied to freedom of expression and freedom of speech. Image File history File links Download high resolution version (800x642, 183 KB) Summary A Please Do Not Contribute To Solicitors sign at the Wal-Mart store in Mountain View, California (near El Camino Real (California)). Signs like these are often seen at large shopping centers in the U.S. state...
Image File history File links Download high resolution version (800x642, 183 KB) Summary A Please Do Not Contribute To Solicitors sign at the Wal-Mart store in Mountain View, California (near El Camino Real (California)). Signs like these are often seen at large shopping centers in the U.S. state...
The PruneYard Shopping Center is a sprawling 250,000 sq. ...
Holding A criminal prohibition against burning draft cards did not violate the First Amendment, because its effect on speech was only incidental, and it was justified by the significant government interest in maintaining an efficient and effective military draft system. ...
Holding A Texas statute that criminalized the desecration of the American flag violated the First Amendment. ...
United States vs. ...
Freedom of Speech on the Internet In a rare 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court extended the full protection of the First Amendment to the Internet in Reno v. ACLU, a decision which struck down portions of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, a law intended to outlaw so-called "indecent" online communication (that is, nonobscene material protected by the First Amendment.) The court's decision identified the Internet as a "free speech zone," and extended the same Constitutional protections given to books, magazines, films, and spoken expression to materials published on the Internet. In Reno v. ...
The Communications Decency Act (CDA) was arguably the first attempt by the United States Congress to regulate pornographic material on the Internet, in response to public concerns in 1996. ...
In United States v. American Library Association (2003) the Supreme Court ruled that Congress has the authority to require public schools and libraries receiving e-rate discounts to install filters as a condition of receiving federal funding. The justices said that any First Amendment concerns were addressed by the provisions in the Children's Internet Protection Act that permit adults to ask librarians to disable the filters or unblock individual sites. The Childrens Internet Protection Act (CIPA) is one of a number of bills that the United States Congress has proposed in an attempt to limit childrens exposure to pornography and other controversial material online. ...
See also First page of the 1644 edition of Areopagitica Areopagitica: A speech of Mr John Milton for the liberty of unlicensed printing to the Parliament of England is a prose tract or polemic by John Milton, published November 23, 1644, at the height of the English Civil War. ...
The US Bill of Rights guarantees the rights of citizens to speak and publish freely. ...
For the book, see Clear and Present Danger. ...
Floyd Abrams is a famous First Amendment lawyer. ...
Floyd Abrams This article reviews the history and background of . ...
Imminent lawless action is a term used in the United States Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. ...
The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) engaged in free speech fights during the period from approximately 1907 to 1916. ...
This article is about the general concept. ...
Shouting fire in a crowded theater is a misquote that refers to Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. ...
External links |
Feeds |
Contact