When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Brandenburg v. Ohio - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

    Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".

  3. Imminent lawless action - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action

    Under the imminent lawless action test, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely. While the precise meaning of "imminent" may be ambiguous in some cases, the court provided later clarification in Hess v.

  4. Shouting fire in a crowded theater - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded...

    [1] [15] The test in Brandenburg is the current Supreme Court jurisprudence on the ability of government to punish speech after it occurs. Despite Schenck being limited, the phrase "shouting fire in a crowded theater" has become synonymous with speech that, because of its danger of provoking violence, is not protected by the First Amendment.

  5. 'The Constitution Is Not a Suicide Pact' - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/constitution-not-suicide-pact...

    That construction, the Supreme Court said, was plainly at odds with freedom of speech. "A function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute," Justice William O. Douglas ...

  6. US Supreme Court sets free-speech test for officials who ...

    www.aol.com/news/us-supreme-court-throws-rulings...

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday in a decision on free speech in the digital age set a new standard for determining if public officials acted in a governmental capacity when ...

  7. United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech...

    The basic principle behind government's regulation of the bar has greater power to regulate the speech of lawyers. [77] A balancing test is employed when the Court considers attorney speech. This test weighs "the State's legitimate interest in regulating the activity in question [with] the interests of the attorney". [78]

  8. UNC, other college protests test free speech and safety ...

    www.aol.com/unc-other-college-protests-test...

    Therefore, while the right to assemble and protest remains protected, it may need to be exercised with caution and flexibility to balance promoting free speech and maintaining public order.

  9. Hate speech in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United...

    Traditionally, however, if the speech did not fall within one of the categorical exceptions, it was protected speech. In 1969, the Supreme Court protected a Ku Klux Klan member's speech and created the "imminent danger" test to determine on what grounds speech can be limited. The court ruled in Brandenburg v.